Oral Questions

1. to the Minister of Immigration: How many people have been deported by Immigration New Zealand since the beginning of March 2020 and, of these, how many have been deported to Pacific Island nations?

on behalf of the Minister of Immigration: I’m advised that the total number of people liable for deportation who were deported by Immigration New Zealand from March 2020, including those who self-deported or in other words, departed voluntarily following compliance action, is 1,088. Of this group of 1,088, 119 people were returned to the Pacific. Deportations to the Pacific are fewer when compared with pre-COVID because of both border restrictions and limitations on available flights. The deportees this year included people who had completed prison sentences for convictions of violence such as assault, serious assaults, threats, and intimidation. Where deportations occur, Immigration New Zealand works closely with Pacific Governments on management of that process.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: Does he share the concerns of the Pacific Leadership Forum that fear and anxiety about deportations is a barrier for Pasifika overstayers being tested and vaccinated, and that this could undermine the Government’s COIVD response?

Look, I think the Government’s been absolutely clear that we’re not approaching deportations in that manner and that we’re doing our utmost to include everyone in the vaccinations that we need every New Zealander to take. These deportations are of a different category. I would also note that in respect of Fiji, which, of course, has had COVID problems develop this year, there has been no deportations at all since 22 April this year.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: Does he think that deporting overstayers in the middle of a pandemic sends a message of fear to a community that is being encouraged to come forward to get tested or vaccinated?

Well, as I said in response to an earlier question, I think we’ve made it abundantly clear that vaccinations are not being used to identify overstayers and that the deportations that we have seen earlier in the pandemic were of a different nature. As I also said in another answer, for example, in Fiji, there has not been one deportation, even for released criminals, since 22 April this year.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: Is the Minister confident that people being deported have been tested for COVID-19 to minimise the risk of unknowingly spreading COVID to Pacific countries?

I can’t answer for every person, partly because a lot of the deportations that there have been are voluntary departures by people whose visas have expired. In respect of people who have come from the corrections system, you will have heard from answers that the Minister of Corrections has given to this House that there are considerable steps undertaken within the corrections system to ensure that everyone is safe and free of COVID.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: Does he consider that a decision on an amnesty for overstayers, as a part of a public health response, should be made now rather than at the end of the year through the immigration review?

No.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: Is the Minister confident that Immigration New Zealand conducts investigations into potential migrant exploitation before deporting overstayers?

Could I ask the member to repeat that question? I’m not sure I caught the import of it.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: Is the Minister confident that Immigration New Zealand conducts investigations into potential migrant exploitation before deporting overstayers?

I don’t have detailed information on that. I do have confidence in the department, but if the member wants to put down a question in writing to the Minister of Immigration, I’m sure he would be happy to reply.

Question No. 2—COVID-19 Response

2. to the Minister for COVID-19 Response: What recent progress has been made on New Zealand’s COVID-19 vaccine programme?

New Zealand is successfully rolling out at pace the largest immunisation programme the country has ever seen. Nationwide, three-quarters of the eligible population aged 12-plus have now received their first dose and 40 percent have received their second dose, meaning that they are fully vaccinated. Fifty-three percent of Māori have had their first dose, with 26 percent getting their second. For Pasifika, the vaccination rates are 68 percent for the first dose and 36 percent for the second. In terms of our over-65 population, 91 percent have received at least their first dose and 80 percent their second. For those aged between 40 and 64, 80 percent have had their first dose and 44 percent their second.

💬 Angie Warren-Clark: How is the vaccine programme specifically progressing in Auckland?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: A phenomenal effort has been undertaken by the people of Auckland over the last six weeks, seeing them leap to the front of the pack with the highest vaccination rates of any region in the country. To date, 1,740,608 doses have been administered in Auckland; 1,134,586 people have had their first dose, allowing them to hit the 80 percent mark in terms of first doses; and 606,000 of them have received both doses and are, therefore, fully vaccinated. I want to pass on my thanks to all those who have been involved in this effort and all those who have already been vaccinated. This is a mammoth operation and they deserve full credit.

💬 Angie Warren-Clark: What innovative steps are being taken to help increase vaccine numbers in Auckland?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Just this morning I met with vaccination providers and the DHBs in Auckland to discuss the ongoing roll-out of the campaign. Auckland have introduced, of course, the now famous Shot Bro buses, which are being targeted specifically to locations where people are currently gathered under level 3 restrictions. The buses are focused on reaching communities less inclined to be actively engaged with the health system. It is a really good example of taking the vaccine directly to the people, and today these buses are out back on the roads in south, west, and east Auckland. I was able to speak with a number of people involved in that earlier today. They are considering other similar and novel approaches to increase vaccine uptake, and I’ll be having similar conversations with other DHBs and providers throughout the rest of this week.

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, I stand by the Government’s decision to increase funding to Māori health providers to provide ongoing support to Māori communities while responding to COVID-19. We know we all need to do all we can to ensure no one is left behind in our response to COVID-19, and that includes in our vaccination programme. Working with Māori and Pacific providers on our COVID response is part of that strategy.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Why were protocols not in place to prevent a COVID-positive gang member being remanded to an address outside of Auckland, despite the Government having 18 months to plan for regional lockdowns?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I refute the premise of that member’s question.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Why are New Zealanders still not able to show digital proof that they have been vaccinated, when most other countries have had this system in place for months?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I’d point the member to the fact that most of those countries who have those digital tools have also been using them as certificates for entry to different sites and so on. Of course, we are not in that position currently. We do have an ability for people to access a demonstration, a certificate of sorts, that they have been vaccinated. People have been doing that through the Ministry of Health and, as I’ve said in this House before, we are currently working on a digital model that will allow people to be able to carry that information certification with them, and we expect that to be completed shortly.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: So did the Prime Minister say just recently, just today, that she refutes the allegation that a COVID-positive gang member was remanded to an address outside of Auckland; in which case, how does she refute that?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I refute that there weren’t protocols in place.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Then why weren’t they followed?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: An individual is able to be bailed to an address outside a level 4, as it were, environment. The issue was around the way that person was potentially transported or came into contact with COVID in the future.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Has she received a report that an additional eight Middlemore staff have been stood down after gang members connected to the Mongrel Mob cluster, who should have been self-isolating, visited an associate on Tuesday evening in the hospital?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Whilst I don’t have the individual affiliation of individual contacts, the member will be aware that there was an individual who was a close contact who did seek to visit another contact. That individual, yes, was meant to be self-isolating. I am advised that that individual has tested negative, but of course is still obliged to continue to follow the public health rules, as we do for all contacts.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: What processes are in place to protect the staff of Middlemore Hospital from situations like this continuing to occur?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I think it’s unfair to state “continuing to occur” as if somehow all 30,000 individuals who have been covered by requirements under our COVID response have somehow acted in this way—they have not. We have here an incident that has occurred where security personnel were involved because they are close contacts—they’ve been treated as contacts as a result of this incident. Of course we want to maintain security to keep our professionals safe, and in this scenario some of those individuals who have come in contact, there are protocols being followed to ensure their ongoing safety from COVID-19.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: So why are gang members being allowed to break lockdown rules, breach their isolation orders, and spread COVID; and what action does she intend to take to stop this continuing?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: It is simply wrong to imply that we have an environment where everyone is just able to do whatever they want. Of course they haven’t. Broadly speaking, we have had excellent compliance. We unfortunately have had some examples where there have been issues with compliance, but I would put the emphasis on “some examples”. The member has relayed one; we’ve had others that relate to our border breaches that we’ve seen that have cut across all walks of life. COVID affects everybody. Our job, collectively, is to make sure that we have rules in place to keep people safe, to do what we can to enforce those rules, and to act when those rules are broken. But the member making assertions as if somehow every single contact has behaved in this way is just wrong.

Question No. 4—Local Government

4. to the Minister of Local Government: What steps has the Government taken to ensure that the Three Waters Reform proposals are well understood by councils?

Right from the beginning, I’ve worked closely with local government. We’ve established a steering group with Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) and Taituarā , and the subsequent technical working group to address specific areas of the work programme. Prior to the local government conference, the Government released detailed information on the case for change, the reform objectives, and proposed design features. The Government and LGNZ technical advisers have provided councils with a variety of tools to help them understand their individual positions with and without reform. Officials from the Department of Internal Affairs and members from LGNZ and Taituarā have undertaken an extensive period of engagement with local government during August and September to ensure the reform proposals and the impact on councils and ratepayers are well understood. LGNZ and officials are continuing to hold one-on-one discussions with councils at their request, as we would expect.

💬 Tangi Utikere: What feedback has she received from councils in relation to the proposed changes?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: At the request of LGNZ, the Government entered into an eight-week period over August and September to enable councils time to consider the reform proposals, understand the implications for their communities, and provide feedback on those proposals. I thank councils who have engaged and provided feedback. I’m hearing some clear themes that include consideration of how the entity governance, planning interface, and iwi and community input will be achieved in the new system, and how they might be strengthened according to local preferences. I’m committed to working in partnership with local government, iwi, and Māori throughout the reform journey, and I have indicated that right from the beginning. I’m also aware that there’s some public discussion about the Government’s modelling, in particular, that undertaken by the Water Industry Commission for Scotland, using data provided by each council. This Government has confidence in the modelling undertaken for us by a reputable international expert organisation. It’s been independently assessed and proven to be robust.

💬 Tangi Utikere: What does she say in response to suggestions that pausing the reform will help the challenges faced by councils?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Pausing the reform discussion will not help to respond to the significant challenges facing councils. Many of New Zealand’s communities are dealing with rising costs and unacceptable outcomes from their three waters services; that’s not good for the health of people or the environment. The case for change is strong, well canvassed, and generally accepted by most. These challenges have been discussed for more than two decades and it’s time to do something about them.

💬 Tangi Utikere: With regards to the issues raised by councils, is there room to consider their concerns within the context of the proposed reforms?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: We’ve given councils eight weeks—until 1 October—to provide feedback on the water reform proposals. As I’ve already noted, prior work and feedback through this period has identified potential refinements to the current policy design. I’m willing to work in partnership with local government and iwi to ensure the reforms meet the needs of communities; that’s very important. We’ve already considered and ruled out alternatives to reform such as regulation-only models and further central government funding of local government infrastructure for an inefficient network. There are inherent challenges that create a cost burden either way on ratepayers or taxpayers. Our reforms—the ones that I’m proposing—are designed to improve public health and environmental outcomes, improve efficiency of service delivery, support a financially sustainable system, improve infrastructure delivery and decision making while upholding the rights and interests of iwi through Te Mana o Te Wai.

💬 Hon Eugenie Sage: Is the Minister still actively considering making it mandatory for councils to become part of the four regional water entities if too many councils decide to opt out; if so, why?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Thank you for the question. As I’ve said, the case for change is compelling, well understood, and needs to be addressed. We’ve undertaken about 30 different sets of modelling to see whether or not there is any significant alternative that would enable a financially sustainable model to invest in the significant costs facing councils. The issue is now for councils to consider the proposal in a way that they will continue to own the assets—albeit within the reform that’s being proposed—and have greater oversight in the way in which efficient governance of those assets can deliver community benefits; that is the proposal in front of councils. We’ve shifted significantly the discussion into a space where, I believe, even councils cannot ignore the opportunity they have ahead of them.

Question No. 5—Broadcasting and Media

5. to the Minister for Broadcasting and Media: Does he stand by his statement, “we are constantly reviewing our safeguards to ensure we have the right tools to respond to potential issues of foreign interference” in relation to reports over Skykiwi’s terms of service?

on behalf of the Minister for Broadcasting and Media: Yes.

Brooke van Velden: When was he first made aware that a leading New Zealand news outlet, Skykiwi, warned its users their information could be shared with relevant State agencies if they violate Chinese law, and does he believe Skykiwi’s terms of service are an infringement of standards expected by media?

I became aware of the situation the member describes in an online article in the last two weeks, and I simply point out to that member that the law in New Zealand covering New Zealand citizens and residents is the law of New Zealand, and laws from other sovereign countries are not enforceable in New Zealand.

Brooke van Velden: Does he believe that New Zealanders of Chinese origin are exposed to Chinese State surveillance and censorship by Skykiwi; and, if so, what is he doing to protect freedom of speech on media platforms?

I think it is a stretch to say that purported conditions of use or participation on an online platform constitutes external surveillance by a different sovereign State. New Zealanders participating in any form of media in New Zealand have the benefit of our laws, including our New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and the confirmed freedoms of speech and expression, and for news media outlets who are covered by, for example, the Media Council, which Skykiwi is, they have the benefit of the principles and values and rules of that organisation, and methods of recourse if a user considers those rules have been breached.

Brooke van Velden: Will his inquiry ensure that we can stop Chinese Communist Party interference of New Zealand media to the extent where media outlets feel obliged to share New Zealanders’ data with the Chinese Communist Party?

I’m not quite sure what inquiry the member is referring to, but what I can say is that there is a review of media content or regulation under way that will also include what the likes of the Media Council and the Broadcasting Standards Authority do to ensure that the organisations under their remit comply with the standards that those organisations stand for.

Brooke van Velden: Does he believe New Zealanders of Chinese origin have the same rights to be free from foreign interference and freedom of association as all New Zealanders?

Well, the people who that member refers to, whilst in New Zealand, are covered by New Zealand laws and rules and norms, and that includes our New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, which confirms and upholds the rights of freedom of expression and freedom of speech.

Question No. 6—Finance

6. to the Minister of Finance: Is he concerned with a report from the Restaurant Association who have said 1,000 of their members are on the brink of closure without additional support; if so, what additional targeted action will his Government take to save these businesses in the hospitality, retail and event sectors?

The loss of businesses and jobs anywhere in the economy amid the uncertainty created by COVID-19 is concerning. That’s why the Government has responded quickly and decisively to put in place support such as the wage subsidy scheme to help firms keep operating and help keep people connected to their jobs. In answer to the second part of the question, as we have done continually through this pandemic, we will update and expand our support to businesses and workers to ensure it is adequate. During this latest outbreak, we’ve expanded the coverage of the Resurgence Support Payment to include new businesses, as well as modified it into a three-weekly payment to recognise the extended period of alert level restrictions. The way that these supports are structured, including criteria around revenue drops, act as a de facto targeting to sectors such as those mentioned in the member’s question, in terms of the support that they have received.

💬 Hon Todd McClay: Thank you. Why has a wage subsidy not been paid to 37,000 businesses who have waited five weeks, and is he aware of the significant financial and mental distress this is causing?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I’m not 100 percent sure how that relates to the primary question that the member’s asked, but as the member is well aware, we’ve traversed this matter in the House before. In large part, this is a data-matching exercise between Inland Revenue and the Ministry of Social Development, in particular for those who are sole traders whose tax code with Inland Revenue does not indicate that they are sole traders. The member and his party have been very keen to make sure that the wage subsidy scheme has integrity measures built into it. This is one of those integrity measures. I have been raising consistently with the Ministry of Social Development and Inland Revenue my desire to see these resolved quickly. I would note that 91 percent of applications are being processed within the three-day period indicated.

💬 Hon Todd McClay: Is it correct that the Government was asked on 9 June by the events sector for assistance with an insurance scheme that would’ve paid $20 million to its members if New Zealand was placed into COVID level 4 and that his Government has said no to this help?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Mr Speaker, again asking, really, whether or not that is relevant to the primary question. But we’ve had ongoing discussions with the events sector going back all the way through to last year. There have been calls for a number of different types of underwriting schemes. At this stage, the Government has decided not to go down that path because, clearly, it would be an enormous precedent setting exercise. I do know that some local councils have taken that on. I would also note that the Government has provided significant assistance to the events sector via, for example, the $50 million fund that’s gone to regional tourism operations to put on events, and we continue to work with the sector to see how else we can support them.

💬 SPEAKER: Just before I ask Mr McClay to ask his next supplementary, I want to make it clear to the Minister of Finance that judgments as to relevance of questions are mine and not his, and his asides are not helpful. In the latest case, he is plainly wrong.

💬 Hon Todd McClay: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Is it fair that businesses currently in level 2 can still apply for the wage subsidy but that Auckland businesses will not be eligible when they go to level 2, even though their need is perhaps greater, and will he change this policy setting for Auckland?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The wage subsidy scheme has always been related to levels 3 and 4, where there are a significant number of businesses who either cannot trade or trade significantly below where they would normally want to do. The Government has put in place the Resurgence Support Payment that is available at level 2 or above to support businesses with fixed costs that are more in line with what the restrictions are at alert level 2, and, as we have said, that Resurgence Support Payment is now available on a three-weekly basis.

💬 Hon Stuart Nash: Can he please advise if the Small Business Cashflow (Loan) Scheme, which is interest free for two years, is available to businesses in the hospitality sector?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Yes, I can confirm that the small business cashflow scheme is open. It is also open to anybody who has already drawn down the funding and paid it back or to those who haven’t drawn down the full amount of funding, and they can top up to that. It is a scheme that is still attracting a number of applications every week.

💬 Hon Todd McClay: What does he say to the owners of the 1,000 restaurants that are reportedly about to close after doing everything that his Government has asked of them, and does he think this sacrifice could be avoided with additional targeted support, not just more debt?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: What I say to those businesses is that, as the Government has done throughout the pandemic, we will continue to work with them. One of the things I do know is that, when we saw similar predictions during the first lockdown, the actual result was that those businesses ended up busier than ever when New Zealand was at alert level 1, to the point that the same organisation mentioned in the member’s primary question was approaching us about the fact that they didn’t have enough staff to meet the demand that was happening during alert level 1. What the answer here is to make sure we continue to take the same response that the Government has taken throughout the pandemic, which is that a strong public health response is the best one for the economy overall.

Point of order, Mr Speaker. Can I ask you to reflect in terms of the earlier exchange that we had around the question and perhaps come back to me, or to the House more broadly? You’ve previously ruled around the relationship between two parts of a question, and obviously the second part of this question is much wider than the first part of the question, and so I just ask you to reflect on what it might mean in terms of questions and supplementaries.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Speaking to the point of order, just in your considerations of that, I think the second part of that question is based on a belief honestly held that the restaurant industry is directly affected by what goes on in the event industry. For example, a sold-out test at Eden Park would indeed fill the cafes and restaurants in Mount Eden. It is, I think, a direct nexus to the first part of the primary question.

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Speaking further to the point of order, I would note for the member that that organisation is called the Restaurant Association, and my understanding about that organisation is that it represents restaurants as opposed to the retail and event sectors.

💬 SPEAKER: I think the Minister of Finance is dancing on the head of a pin, and I feel no need to—

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Must be a bloody big pin!

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Well, it is about restaurants!

💬 SPEAKER: Well, Thursday afternoon, Mr Bridges and Mr Brownlee. I understand your wish to get early planes, but we’ll just leave it for now, shall we? I shall punish you by making you stay here. I’ll go back to the Minister of Finance and tell him that I don’t need any more time to reflect. My ruling stands.

Question No. 7—Agriculture

7. to the Minister of Agriculture: What recent support has the Government provided for the agricultural sector?

The Government continues to support the engine room of our economy as we build our recovery from COVID-19 and seek to position ourselves in high-value markets. I’d like to take the opportunity to thank those people through the farming sectors who have worked right to keep our export revenue coming into this country. I recently announced further investments to support them through the Sustainable Food and Fibre Futures fund. To date the Government has co-invested more than $150 million into 157 projects worth almost $299 million in total. It’s a key part of the Government’s Fit for a Better World, accelerating our economic potential road map. We’ve also announced funding of catchment groups, with 171 now supported across New Zealand by the Government, and we are supporting a total investment of almost $29 million.

💬 Anna Lorck: What are some of the recent projects being funded through the Sustainable Food and Fibre Futures fund?

💬 Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR: We’re investing $6.68 million, for example, into a seven-year partnership with Beef + Lamb New Zealand, which is targeting a 10 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions per kilogram of product produced. It’s also expected to result in more efficient cows within the next 25 years through the use of artificial insemination and genomic selection to identify the bulls with the best genetic markers earlier in their life, and with greater accuracy. We’re also contributing $2.6 million to a $5 million project to develop a commercial-scale autonomous robotic asparagus harvester to help address the ongoing labour shortages in the asparagus industry and to support New Zealand asparagus growers to tap into high-value export markets.

💬 Anna Lorck: How is the Government engaging with the farming sector in practical ways to help it restore waterways?

💬 Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR: We have said that we want waterways restored within a generation, and, to that end, last week I also announced the $2.1 million funding for 31 farmer-led catchment groups in the lower North Island—in the Rangitīkei, Manawatū, and Wairarapa. This enables growers’ groups and farmers to employ catchment coordinators and farmers to develop farm environment plans to understand the environmental challenges and opportunities on their property, as well as helping farmers to produce nutrient budgets, calculate their agricultural greenhouse gas emissions, and understand changing environmental regulations. It’s through farmers working together in catchment groups and integrating the practical insights from them into their farm plans that we’ll be able to shift the dial.

Question No. 8—COVID-19 Response

8. to the Minister for COVID-19 Response: What specific progress has been made with negotiations with Pfizer for COVID-19 booster shots, which the Director-General of Health said over a month ago were “at sort of a fairly crucial stage”, and is New Zealand intending on ordering booster shots for the COVID-19 vaccine programme?

To date, the Pfizer vaccine has been approved for two doses and Medsafe awaits data from Pfizer clinical trials before approving its use for additional doses. The Ministry of Health is in continual discussion with Pfizer and other pharmaceutical companies about New Zealand’s future vaccine needs and it continues to review all of the latest scientific evidence. Commercial conversations with the suppliers remain sensitive and I won’t be disclosing specific details.

💬 Chris Bishop: Why were negotiations with Pfizer for booster shots at a critical stage over a month ago; why have they not yet concluded?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: In the context of commercial negotiations, you often reach particularly important points in the negotiations and I’ll imagine the director-general felt at that point that we were at a particularly important point in the discussions with Pfizer.

💬 Chris Bishop: Right. Why has New Zealand not taken a no-regrets approach to ordering boosters—in other words, ordering as many as we possibly can as quickly as we can to give ourselves options in the event that we need them?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: That is exactly what the New Zealand Government has been doing around vaccines. That is why we continue to adopt a portfolio approach to vaccines, so that we have options based on what our future needs may be, so that we’re not narrowing down too much and making decisions too prematurely about what might be best for New Zealand’s needs in the future.

💬 Chris Bishop: Will New Zealanders be at the front of the queue for booster shots if they are needed?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: It will depend on the nature of the booster shots needed when they might be needed. I can say that from the conversations we’ve been having with Pfizer, I am confident that in the event that the evidence stacks up, supporting the need for a third shot of the Pfizer vaccine, we will be able to get access to that in a timely manner. But I also want to reiterate that we are not banking on that being the only option that New Zealand needs to have access to. We are in discussions with other pharmaceutical companies. Where agreements have been signed and it’s appropriate to announce them, that’s what we do.

💬 Chris Bishop: Is the Government in discussions with companies other than those that we have advance purchase agreements with for the four vaccines at the moment, and, if so, what are those companies?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: In answer to the first part of the question, yes. In answer to the second part of the question, those are commercial negotiations.

Question No. 9—Internal Affairs

9. to the Minister of Internal Affairs: How is the Government encouraging young New Zealanders to make informed decisions online?

I am pleased to inform the House that the Government’s innovative and successful “Keep It Real Online” campaign is back, with the latest episode of the Eggplant series now available on TVNZ Ondemand and YouTube. This latest episode is focused on tackling misinformation. Misinformation is often camouflaged to make it hard to tell what’s real and what’s not. It’s a big issue for our young people, particularly at the moment, when getting and sharing accurate information about COVID-19 vaccinations is so important. Equipping young people with the tools to determine fact from fiction has never been more critical. And can I also recommend that to the members in this House.

💬 Jamie Strange: Why was the theme of misinformation and disinformation chosen?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: We know from the last nationwide lockdown that young Kiwis are spending more time online than ever. We also know from a report released by the Classification Office that 75 percent of New Zealanders surveyed thought false information about COVID-19 is an urgent and serious threat to New Zealand society. So it’s really important that young people are getting and sharing reliable information about COVID-19 and vaccinations, so they can make well-informed decisions. This latest episode is targeted to 13- to 18-year-olds, and explores how easy it can be to take information at face value without checking the facts.

💬 Jamie Strange: Why was the miniseries chosen as the format for the educational campaign?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: The Government recognises that traditional forms of public health and safety messages are not always the best way to reach our young people, and that we need to evolve with the times. The whole purpose of the “Keep It Real Online” campaign is to explore complex and sensitive issues in a way that young people find engaging and relatable. The focus on identifying false information in the latest episode takes a light-hearted approach to this serious subject and encourages young people to engage their critical thinking. Students from Rangitoto College and Manurewa High School were involved in the creation of this episode, to ensure that the messages are understood and that the storyline is engaging.

Question No. 10—Transport

10. to the Minister of Transport: Does he agree with the Motor Industry Association that “When combining fees under the clean car discount with penalties under the clean car standard, the price for light vehicles will need to increase on average by about 15 to 20 percent to offset the penalties”, and what advice has he received on any likely increase in the price of light vehicles as a result of his policies?

on behalf of the Minister of Transport: To the first part of the question, no. The fees and rebates under the clean-car discount are applied at the point of registration of the vehicle, so do not apply to importers and sellers. As the standard is based on the fleet of vehicles imported by importers, they can use a range of vehicles to achieve an average emission that meets the target—for example, this allows importers to sell electric and hybrid cars to offset higher-emitting vehicles and achieve compliance. In those instances, importers would not be subject to any penalty and, therefore, it should not affect buyers. To the second part of the question, as I said to the previous transport spokesperson on 29 June on this very matter, I have received a range of advice on that matter, including “a meta-analysis of CO2 standards in OECD and non-OECD countries suggest they do not necessarily lead to noticeable price increases.” The ministry’s projections expect the price of electric vehicles and petrol hybrids to fall over the period. The risk of supply constraints and price rises is also mitigated by the design of the standard. Its design has been substantially modified from the standard that was consulted upon.

💬 Hon David Bennett: Does he stand by Annex 1 of his Cabinet paper “Clean car discount finalising our standing decisions”, which details that the car fees will be progressively phased in so that in 2028 even a small car like a Suzuki Swift will be taxed?

💬 SPEAKER: I’m going to ask the member to rephrase his question so it relates to either of the parts of the primary question or the answer that was given.

💬 Hon David Bennett: When the Minister said that he has received advice on the price impact on new cars that buyers will have when they purchase under these new rules, then does he stand by his Cabinet paper which details that car fees will be progressively phased in so that in 2028 even a small car like a Suzuki Swift will be taxed?

💬 SPEAKER: No. No, advice given to a Minister and Ministers’ Cabinet papers are quite different things.

💬 Hon David Bennett: Well, I’ll try again, then. Supplementary question—

💬 SPEAKER: That’s fine, but this is your next supplementary. You had one extra go at it.

💬 Hon Member: Oh, that’s a bit unfair.

💬 SPEAKER: No, it’s not unfair if the member can’t get it right. He’s been a Minister. He knows the difference between advice and Cabinet papers.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Point of order, Mr Speaker.

💬 SPEAKER: A point of order, the Hon Michael Woodhouse—[Interruption]—and people over there will be quiet.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Well, if that’s the case, we could help you.

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Mr Brownlee, they made their comments before I called Mr Woodhouse. You made them afterwards. Your breach is, if possible, worse than theirs.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Mr Speaker, it’s very clear to anybody reading Cabinet papers that the recommendations are the Minister’s, but the information that is contained in an annex that supports it is the advice that the Minister receives. I think we’re dancing on the head of a definitional pin to say that that supplementary question is out of order.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, my view is that if the member was right, it would be the end of ministerial responsibility.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Well, speaking to that point, the—

💬 SPEAKER: No, I’m not going to have a debate. I’m going back to David Bennett.

💬 Hon David Bennett: Can he confirm that if taxes are phased in on light vehicles, the Ministry of Transport modelling shows only a 0.2 percent reduction in New Zealand’s emissions in 2030?

The combination of policies here are projected to reduce New Zealand’s projected greenhouse gas emissions by over 5 million tonnes.

💬 Hon David Bennett: Why won’t he release a finalised fees schedule before the submissions begin on the clean vehicles bill so that people know what vehicles will be taxed and when?

Well, I understand that the submissions are important. We actually want to hear from the industry and other people who are involved.

💬 Hon David Bennett: Point of order, Mr Speaker. He didn’t answer the question. He said that submissions were important. I said why wouldn’t he release—he should surely answer that.

💬 SPEAKER: I will ask the Minister to be more—to have an answer which relates more to the question about the release.

Well, on behalf of the Minister: I’m actually unable to discuss the release without talking to the Minister, but the Government does want to hear from the industry. That’s why we’ve got a full select committee hearing, and those issues will be canvassed at the select committee.

Question No. 11—Customs

11. to the Minister of Customs: What is Customs doing to facilitate trade and support New Zealand’s economic recovery from COVID-19?

Customs is increasing trade opportunities and helping goods to flow more efficiently across the border, contributing to the economic recovery of New Zealand’s economy from the impacts of COVID-19. Internationally, Customs is advancing work to upgrade the ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement and is contributing to new free-trade agreements with the United Kingdom and the European Union. In June, a work plan towards a mutual recognition agreement with Thailand and the United Kingdom was agreed to, while work on a secure trade lane with Australia continues to progress. Customs has expanded its Authorised Economic Operator programme, the Secure Exports Scheme, and made it easier for businesses to join—in particular, Māori exporters. It has marketed the service so approved traders can benefit from certainty of supply chain and delivery time frames. Customs continues to engage with small to medium sized enterprises (SMEs) through its work on APEC 2021 to learn more about some of the challenges and opportunities these enterprises face as they navigate the COVID-19 environment and ways in which Customs administration can support the economic growth of SMEs in the region. Supporting small to medium sized enterprises is a valuable way of increasing the diversity of New Zealand’s export base and encouraging economic growth in the regions.

💬 SPEAKER: Can I just say to the Minister that that answer was far too long.

💬 Glen Bennett: How is Customs supporting the import of critical supplies here in Aotearoa as well as overseas?

💬 Hon MEKA WHAITIRI: Customs is working closely with industry groups and other Government agencies to ensure there are no delays in clearing critical supply chain goods, including the COVID-19 vaccine. Customs recently led work to deliver a set of best-practice guidelines for Customs administration to support the roll-out of COVID-19 vaccines in the APEC region. This was a great win not just for New Zealand but also the 21 member economies to ensure that COVID-19 vaccine and related goods flowed across borders as quickly and as efficiently as possible.

💬 Glen Bennett: How is Customs supporting New Zealand traders to navigate the impacts of COVID-19?

💬 Hon MEKA WHAITIRI: Since the onset of COVID-19, Customs has negotiated repayment plans with 350 businesses on around $130 million worth of debt. Of that amount, only $30,000 remains outstanding. Customs has also lessened the load by allowing refunds of interest and penalties on repayment plans. Measures like these provide much-needed breathing space, allowing affected businesses to pivot if needed and, ultimately, build back better.

Question No. 12—Local Government

12. to the Minister of Local Government: Does she stand by all of her statements and actions?

Yes, in particular when I thank the Federated Farmers and Irrigation New Zealand for their involvement to ensure the workability of the Water Services Bill and to confirm that Taumata Arowai will work according to the scale, complexity, and risk profile of drinking-water suppliers so that there are more appropriate responses for small and rural communities.

💬 Barbara Kuriger: What is her response to Local Government New Zealand president Stuart Crosby’s request to her and the Prime Minister, with respect to three waters, “There needs to be more time to work through the key outstanding issues beyond the current eight weeks.”?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: My response to Stuart Crosby has been what it has always been: we will continue to work with local government to ensure that the water reform proposals that are being forwarded are done in partnership with the sector.

💬 Barbara Kuriger: Will she pause or halt the three waters reforms given Local Government New Zealand and numerous mayors, councils, and communities across the country have called for her to do so, and, if not, why not?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: No. Pausing the conversation around the reform agenda will not change the scale, size, or complexity of the challenge confronting councils. We’ve provided evidence and research that shows that the looming costs facing councils will be unbearable by ratepayers. We’ve also highlighted the need for councils to consider this seriously, because once Taumata Arowai is stood up, higher drinking-water standards and environmental standards are enforced, the several councils that are operating their waste-water treatment plants on expired consents will significantly bear the load of infrastructure investment.

💬 Barbara Kuriger: Will she take to Cabinet any changes to the water entity model; if so, what will they be, and, if not, why not?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: I’ve given an undertaking to Local Government New Zealand that we will work with them and councils to understand the information. They will have up until 1 October. At that point, I will present information to Cabinet and identify the range of issues that we can work on with the sector to address many of the challenges that they’ve identified during that period. I’ve given an indication in an earlier question of what those challenges are: governance arrangements, the way in which councils will work with iwi and their communities around the benefits of reform, and also the way in which economic regulation will help deliver those benefits.