Oral Questions

1. to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by her Government’s plan to reopen our borders, and by when will the almost 25,000 people who missed out on MIQ spaces yesterday be able to come home?

Yes. I stand by the Government’s plan to reconnect New Zealanders with the world, which many will remember was released in August of this year. In particular, I stand by the plan’s objectives to stamp out the virus, reduce the need for further lockdowns, maintain strong public health tools, and develop ways for people to travel safely to and from New Zealand. I know how hard it has been for those New Zealanders wanting to travel back to New Zealand at a time when there have been severe constraints on our managed isolation system. And while an extra 6,000 people were able to book spaces last night, in addition to the existing 12,000 already booked till Christmas, that is why we have a plan to move past managed isolation, which we’ve signalled for the first quarter of 2022. But no New Zealander wants to travel to New Zealand and put their fellow Kiwis at risk, and that’s why we have a plan to open the borders in a safe way that doesn’t mean more restrictions at home than is necessary.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Why has she still not told New Zealanders the rate of vaccination that will allow us to reconnect with the world?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: We’ve talked about the need for high vaccinations at 90-plus. We’ve also talked about a time frame—the first quarter of 2022. We’ve been doing that since the beginning of last month when we released—on the advice of Professor David Skegg and his public health advisory group—our reconnecting to New Zealand plan. I note the member has taken a different view. She believes that we should adopt what is a broadly similar framework but much earlier. That runs the risk of having cases at our border unchecked when we have over, roughly, 1.5 million New Zealanders unvaccinated. It is, however, up to the member to justify her own plans.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: What does she mean by “as high as possible”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: That the more New Zealanders who are vaccinated, the less likely it is that we’ll need domestic restrictions, and the less likely it is that we’ll see hospitalisations that could have been prevented. I’m not alone in talking about 90-plus. That is where you’ll see the vast majority of health experts who choose to be named talking about vaccination rates. I note in the National Party plan there is no reflection of the kinds of local restrictions that would be needed with the plan that’s been presented today, because there is no question that there would be cases seeded at the border. All modelling that is undertaken suggests that would be likely, whether it’s Doherty or whether it’s Hendy, but I see nothing other than mask use to suggest there’d be any—

💬 Chris Bishop: No. Read the plan.

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: —domestic restrictions to manage those likely cases.

💬 Chris Bishop: Ha, ha!

💬 Hon Judith Collins: When will she tell—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Mr Bishop.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: When will she tell New Zealanders what requirements someone coming from a low-risk country will have when flying home to New Zealand?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I refer the member to the reconnecting to New Zealand plan, which the member probably would be able to answer that question herself, seeing her plan seems to draw on it. It has three pathways: low, medium, and risk. For those low-risk countries where they have—essentially, where they are free of COVID, then they would be able to travel, essentially, with no isolation requirements. For those from medium-risk countries—and they’re vaccinated—there would be modified isolation requirements. The difference between the Government’s plan is that we have talked about high vaccination rates in the first quarter of 2022. We have also prioritised New Zealanders here not facing undue and unnecessary additional restrictions to manage what would inevitably be a rate of seeded cases at the border. I refer the member to Canada. They removed all border restrictions for citizens who are double vaccinated, and, in some cases, they are facing a significant fourth wave, and it has meant that they have domestic restrictions. There is no free lunch. You do have to make trade-offs. We’ve decided to prioritise domestically trying to get the settings as low as possible for New Zealanders, and, in time we will see changes at our border as well.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Does she consider it a free lunch, then, for New Zealanders who are overseas being forced to watch dying family members take their final breaths by Zoom, because her Government was so slow to get the vaccine rolled out?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I really reject the member’s statement there. All of those situations are incredibly difficult, and every member in this House will have sympathy for family members who have been separated by COVID the world over. We do have a process that enables, in those situations, New Zealanders to get to the top of any wait-list to be able to make it home to see their family members. So I would, rather than put out information that implies otherwise, I would rather those New Zealanders know: please get in touch with the Ministry of Health if you have a situation like that so they can support you home.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Will her reopening plan allow double-vaccinated Kiwis in countries with low levels of COVID to come home for Christmas without needing to win the managed isolation and quarantine lottery?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Under that member’s plan, I’d be interested in what she defines as “low level”. We have already done so; we released it in August. But one of those green zones, as the member will be aware, was Australia. Things dramatically changed there and that obviously moved into a high-risk category. We have had the Cook Islands able to enter into New Zealand, but, of course, they’ve chosen to shut off to us. Where it has been low-risk, we have opened. In October, we will be reopening for Recognised Seasonal Employer workers from Vanuatu, Tonga, and Samoa. Where it’s low risk, we have opened, but, as it turns out, very few countries in this world right now are low risk.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: To the Prime Minister, which does she think New Zealanders would prefer: a COVID-free Christmas or reopening the borders early and getting COVID for Christmas?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Essentially, this is where, obviously, the National Party’s put their penny down. They’ve decided to move forward the border opening. Our view has been to get the restrictions right domestically, try and give New Zealanders as much freedom as possible, get those vaccination rates up so the impact of border openings is lessened, and move in the first quarter of 2022.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: If her plan is to have as many people vaccinated as possible in the first half of next year but no particular number based on that before she can reopen, then why can’t she just get more people vaccinated now so Kiwis can come home for Christmas?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I reject the premise of that member’s question. But also, as we have traversed in this House many a time, vaccinations are currently available and ready for every single New Zealander right now. But if the member may choose to look around globally, every single country around the world, once they get to high rates, it does get harder. That is why we have already overtaken the United States on first doses, who has had vaccine available for months. Because there are some members of our population who choose not to be vaccinated, that’s the group I would hope everyone in this House would unite behind assisting to see the benefits of vaccine.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: So under her Government’s plan, what happens when we get to the first part of next year and the vaccination rate hasn’t gone up into over 90 percent?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Of course, as we’ve said, our view is that we can get to those high rates, our view is that we can do it within a reasonable time frame, but our view still is that in the first quarter of 2022 is a more likely time frame for being able to move on the border. But also I would caution the member that if she chooses to look at any international evidence—if she chooses to—she’ll see that most countries have moved on the border last. It is the last lever they pull, rather than the first lever. So rather than assessing the impact of vaccination on COVID rates, ensuring you’ve got your domestic settings right and protecting New Zealanders at home, the member instead wants to open the floodgate without getting it right first. That is rushed and it is risky.

💬 David Seymour: Is the Prime Minister meaning to say that the border can’t be opened because, after 18 months, her Government’s still far from getting the domestic settings right?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: No—absolutely not. But if the member thinks that domestic settings based on Alpha would be any good right now, then obviously he hasn’t looked at what’s happening around the world. In fact, the settings for vaccine under Alpha are vastly different to now. You have to adapt, and the benefit of the New Zealand approach has been that we’ve done that and we’ve done it very successfully.

💬 David Seymour: Has the Prime Minister only just realised that there are new variants of COVID; and, if not, why is she so unprepared for them?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Mr Speaker, do I even have to answer that?

💬 SPEAKER: Well, I mean, I could have ruled it out for irony. The member, I think, knew that I could have ruled it out for irony, but I think the Prime Minister’s absolutely capable of answering.

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Of course the entire global community is aware of the range of variants that exist. But if the member is suggesting that we can base a research and evidence-based approach on a variant where most of the research around transmissibility, around infectivity, and around hospitalisation has only emerged since the latter part of this year.

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: Further to the last supplementary question, is the Prime Minister aware of a document released yesterday that said that the Government was prepared for a new variant—released by the ACT Party?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I am, but I’m no longer looking for any consistency in any Opposition’s plans on COVID.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Isn’t the biggest risk to New Zealand the fact that she delivered the slowest vaccine roll-out in the developed world while failing to invest in our health system to prepare for Delta?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I absolutely reject that, and also, again, as I’ve just said in a previous answer, we’ve now surpassed on first doses the likes of the United States. We’ve had the highest rate of vaccination per capita of any of the countries we would compare ourselves to. And while we’re at it, we’ve had the lowest case rates, the lowest hospitalisations, the lowest death rates, and some of the best economic performance in the world. The member cannot rewrite history. Our approach has been successful. The point is that COVID is tough on everyone and it’s not finished.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: So if she rejects that assertion, then which country is the slowest in the developed world?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: As I’ve just said, we have passed the countries the member has consistently compared us to.

Question No. 2—Environment

2. to the Minister for the Environment: Xiexie, Mr Speaker. Does he stand by his statement that “we as a Government decided that we needed to introduce strict rules to stop the further loss of wetlands”; if so, does he intend for the changes now proposed to the National Environmental Standards for Freshwater to make it easier to consent activities such as quarrying, mining, and landfills within or near a wetland?

In answer to the first part of the question: yes. In answer to the second part of the question: as the member will be aware, the National Environmental Standards (NES) was not intended to stop quarries and landfills. The member will also be aware from the publicly released discussion document that the proposal is that any amount of wetland loss caused by those activities will have to be offset elsewhere.

💬 Hon Eugenie Sage: What advice has he received about ecological effects and the extent of further wetland loss allowed by the proposed changes to the NES provisions around quarrying, mining, landfills, and urban development within and next to wetlands?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: The advice that I have received is that most of the wetland loss that we have seen is outside of those areas. I do understand the absolutism that the member favours, and, actually, I share her ambition to protect wetlands. But I think that almost everyone in this House understands that we need quarries, and, notwithstanding the member’s good work in respect of reducing waste, we also need landfills. Obviously, landfills are generally not on hilltops; they’re generally in low points, and so on occasions there is some modest loss of wetland that is unavoidable. We will be trying to minimise that and offsetting any remaining wetland loss.

💬 Hon Eugenie Sage: When he said in this House in May, “that we’ve gone too far in the prohibited activity status in respect of some of [these] activities”, does he believe that in destroying 90 percent of our natural wetlands in Aotearoa we have gone too far?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: I stand by both of those statements. I certainly think that we have to stand up for our remaining wetlands. It is true that even outside of national parks, we have lost 90 percent of the wetlands that we used to have, and that we have to do much better because in the last decade or so we lost a 20th of the remaining 10 percent. What’s proposed here in respect of wetlands and quarries won’t diminish the outcome in any material sense. It is necessary, but offsets in respect of what is unavoidable will be required.

💬 Hon Eugenie Sage: With a Landcare Research study for his ministry showing that 13 percent of Aotearoa New Zealand’s remaining freshwater wetlands were damaged or destroyed between 2002 and 2015, how can New Zealanders have any confidence that the proposed consenting pathway in the NES will prevent further wetland damage and destruction?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: I think we’ve got New Zealanders on our side in respect of this issue about the need to protect wetlands, and I’ve done a lot to promote that on behalf of the Government. In respect of the ease with which people have been able to nix wetlands in recent decades, that is over and is now illegal.

💬 Hon Eugenie Sage: How will removing a prohibition on activities that destroy or degrade wetlands, such as mining and quarrying, support the 2030 goal of the Aotearoa New Zealand Biodiversity Strategy that “There has been no loss of the extent or condition of indigenous land, wetland, or freshwater ecosystems which have been identified as having high biodiversity value”?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: Well, that quote takes me back to the reference to absolutism which I mentioned in answer to an earlier supplementary. That absolutism is not possible. We do need quarries in order to produce gravel, in order to build houses and other infrastructure. We should, when we have quarries, be absolutely minimising the amount of wetland loss, but where there is a small amount of unavoidable wetland loss, that should be offset. We do need quarries.

Question No. 3—Finance

3. to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the resilience of the New Zealand economy to the impacts of COVID-19?

The Government’s scientific and health-led response to support the economy has been recognised by the global ratings agency Standard and Poor’s (S&P). S&P Global Ratings published its latest economic outlook for Asia-Pacific today, lowering its expected growth rate for the region in 2021 to 6.7 percent from 7.1 percent it forecast in June. New Zealand and Singapore were the only economies that S&P expects to have faster growth than it forecast in June. It upgraded New Zealand’s forecast growth this year from 4.6 percent to 5.4 percent. They said, “The strong growth recorded in the first half of 2021 means that we will see robust full-year growth in New Zealand, even after taking into account a sharp slowdown due to the recent pandemic-related lockdowns. We expect consumer spending and the labour market to remain resilient.” Standard and Poor’s expects New Zealand to record solid growth in the next three years and indicates a confidence in New Zealand businesses and workers that we have shown over the last year.

💬 Greg O'Connor: What reports has he seen on the contribution of the agricultural sector to the economy?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The economic recovery and our resilience is continuing to be supported by the dairy sector. Last week, dairy prices at the Global Dairy Trade auction gained 1 percent and follow a 4 percent gain in the previous auction early in September. The gains were driven by stronger returns for whole milk powder, which is a key indicator for the pay-out for dairy farmers. It shows that dairy is holding up well to Delta COVID-19 and does bode well for the Farmgate Milk Price due to the relatively large volumes of the product being traded at this time of the season, when production is near its peak. Fonterra’s mid-point forecast payout for the current season of $8 per kilo of milk solids would be the second highest in the cooperative sector. Overseas demand for our agricultural products remains robust, despite the volatile global environment, and we thank the sector for its contribution to the economy.

💬 Greg O'Connor: What reports has he seen on the resilience of households to COVID-19?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The latest Westpac McDermott Miller Employment Confidence Index report found confidence among households has eased following the rise in alert levels, but this is far less pronounced than last year’s lockdown. The index declined 4.4 percent to 102.7 in the September quarter, compared with the previous June quarter, and below the long-term average of 110.6. While there was some growing nervousness about the economic outlook, in the survey households said that they felt fairly secure about their personal financial situation. In fact, an increasing number of respondents reported their financial position had improved over the last year, and most expected that their finances would continue to strengthen over the coming year. This bodes well for the economy as our alert level settings are eased, and it shows that our science- and health-led response continues to work for the economy.

Question No. 4—Justice

4. to the Minister of Justice: What consultation, if any, and with whom, did the Government take on the commercial tenancy measures announced on 28 September 2021?

Kia ora, Mr Speaker. Small-business owners from all over New Zealand have been contacting the Government to express that they’re feeling the impacts of the recent COVID alert level measures, and it was important for the Government to move quickly so it could deal with the concerns that small-business owners were raising. To ensure the measures we have announced would be effective, the Ministry of Justice met with the likes of the New Zealand Law Society property section to consider the specific legal instruments that have been proposed, and I’m advised that that group represents both landlords and tenants. The ministry also spoke to the Auckland District Law Society to understand the current situation with leases that address the COVID-19 situation. While the majority of businesses have arrived at an arrangement for a fair rent reduction when they are unable to trade because of the pandemic, for those who haven’t this could be the difference between staying afloat or not.

💬 David Seymour: Did the Minister consult anybody representing the actual landlords, such as the Property Council, and how would he respond to their statement today that “What the Government fails to realise is that these property owners are the same people who are working hard to keep construction, development and housing projects going. They have effectively dropped”—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! [Interruption]

💬 David Seymour: —“a bomb on their most vital industry.”?

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Far too long.

💬 David Seymour: Well, I’ve ended the quote now, Mr Speaker, and I—

💬 SPEAKER: Well, the member’s finished his question.

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: As I mentioned, the Ministry of Justice engaged with stakeholders that represent both landlords and tenants. I understand the concerns that the Property Council raised as a result of the announcement that the Government made yesterday. I’d also, to counter that, acknowledge the concerns of many small businesses around the country who have been struggling since the higher alert levels and the impacts of next to no revenue as a result of that. So in terms of the announcement made by the Government yesterday, this Government deeply cares about making sure that we do everything we can do to support small businesses, and I thought that would be something that that member’s party would support too.

💬 David Seymour: Did the Government consider the alternative of making the resurgence payment weekly so small businesses could pay rent, instead of rushed retrospective legislation that unprecedentedly undermines contract law in this country?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: A threshold to imply a clause like this in the remaining contracts that don’t have a fair payment arrangement was not a light decision to take. But we believe, given the impacts of businesses, particularly in the Auckland area, that the Government met that threshold in order to ensure that the Government was taking a number of measures to ensure that we can ensure their long-term sustainability.

💬 David Seymour: What impact does the Minister think a rushed and retrospective interference by Parliament in private contract law might have on confidence in property rights and the rule of law among people thinking about investing in New Zealand?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: I don’t necessarily want to rely on the impacts that the Government may think. I’d also be interested in some of those people who might be impacted by this. And I would like to quote from one piece of correspondence that we got back in the last 24 hours, where the correspondent said, “Big thanks to you for making these changes. This is an absolute game-changer for us as we navigate a long-term recovery for our sector in the hospitality sector.” The correspondent said, “We are all in uncharted territory with this pandemic. We are now confident that our sector will be an important part of the future economic recovery of the country.”

💬 David Seymour: Will the Minister, on behalf of this Government, rule out any further such interference in private contracts that are rushed and retrospective like this one for the rest of the parliamentary term or may there be more to come for people who thought their property rights were secure?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: What I can assure the member is this Government will take seriously any measure that will help businesses that are feeling the impacts of COVID-19 and lockdown levels, that are under threat of going to the wall, to make sure that those businesses can stay afloat and continue to support jobs for New Zealanders.

Question No. 5—COVID-19 Response

5. to the Minister for COVID-19 Response: Xiexie, Mr Speaker. What recent progress has been made on New Zealand’s COVID-19 vaccine programme across regions?

Yesterday, 44,000 doses were administered across the country, meaning that 78 percent of the eligible 12-plus New Zealand population now have their first shot. Significantly, we’re also seeing real growth in second doses, and consequently full vaccinations. In the last seven days, the number of Kiwis who have had their second doses has increased by almost 200,000, to 1.8 million—around 44 percent of the eligible population, and we’re zooming towards half of the eligible population being fully vaccinated. I can’t overstate the importance of those 1.8 million people now being fully vaccinated. It’s a hugely significant step forward for the ongoing protection of New Zealand.

💬 Dr Emily Henderson: How is the vaccine programme progressing across the Northland region, particularly for different age bands?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The data that I have is 1,292,000 people across the Northland and Auckland metro region have received at least one dose of the vaccine, representing 81 percent of the eligible community, and 747,429 of those have received both doses and are now fully vaccinated. We are seeing really positive numbers, particularly from the 65-and-over age cohort in the north: over 235,000, representing 91 percent of the over-65s, have had their first dose, and 210,000, or 82 percent, are fully vaccinated.

💬 Sarah Pallett: How is the vaccine programme progressing along the southern regions, particularly for ethnic communities?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Mr Speaker, 768,000 people across—[Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume his seat. Some of us want to hear the answer to this, and I don’t know whether it’s because the member’s mask’s slipping, but he is getting pretty loud. It is a serious question, and deserves the House listening to it rather than ridiculing it.

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Mr Speaker, 768,000 people across the South Island have had their first dose. That represents 78 percent of the eligible community in the South Island; 439,577 of those individuals are now fully immunised. Eighty percent of eligible Pacific people across the southern DHBs have had at least their first dose, 47 percent their second; 59 percent of eligible Māori have had one dose, and 31 percent have had both.

💬 Barbara Edmonds: How are the Midland and MidCentral regions progressing with the roll-out of the vaccine programme, and what innovative steps are being taken to attract more Kiwis to be vaccinated?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Some good news: I can say that Capital and Coast and Hutt Valley DHBs currently top the table in terms of vaccines delivered across the country, and 1.2 million people across the North Island south of Auckland have had their first dose, with 677,778 now fully vaccinated. We’ve seen steps taken by a number of DHBs to help get people out to be vaccinated, including drive-throughs, pop-ups, mobile clinics, and household vaccinations. Education teams and door knockers have partnered with mobile vaccination teams. We’ve seen the targeting of rangatahi through high-concentration areas, including things like touch rugby, softball, kapa haka, and so on, in having vaccination available through those sorts of events. Many also will have heard about the now-famous bacon sandwich offered by the Taranaki DHB, which has attracted hundreds of locals to be vaccinated, and I understand the DHB doubled down on this today by offering a second helping of bacon butties at their vaccination site, alongside granola on the menu. I’m not sure that would drag that many people in for their vaccinations, but all ideas are on the table when it comes to getting people out and getting them vaccinated, and I thank all those working behind the scenes to make that happen.

Question No. 6—Health

6. to the Minister of Health: Why, as at 6 September 2021, did our public hospitals only have 327 resourced ICU beds, when there were 358 ICU beds and ICU-capable beds available at the end of April 2020?

The member’s assertion that there were 358 ICU beds and ICU capable beds in our public hospitals at the end of April 2020 is wrong. I assume the member refers to the figure of 358 because it appears on the Ministry of Health website dealing with ICU capability and ventilators. I refer the member to the text accompanying that data: “The beds are predominantly within DHB hospitals but also include ICU beds available by agreement for use in private hospitals.” I’m advised that at the end of April 2020, an agreement reached with private hospitals during the peak of the first COVID-19 outbreak saw 30 beds kept available in the private hospital network for ICU patients. The figures provided for 6 September 2021 does not include those 30 beds. I might add that in addition to availability of beds since August last year, the DHBs have acquired additional ventilators and now have around 700 intensive care capable ventilators. We’ve commenced, also, a training programme to upskill nurses to work in an ICU environment, and we have trained roughly 1,400 nurses under this programme.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: How does he explain his answer to written question No. 41987 showing that there is not a single new resourced ICU bed in any one of the three Auckland DHBs since the end of the first COVID outbreak last year?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: Well, as that member well knows, the availability of ICU beds literally changes from one day to the next. It is dependent on the throughput of patients in hospitals for other treatments; also the availability of staff, because some staff available one day may fall sick the next and are therefore not available, and that will alter the availability of ICU beds. The reality is we have available at the moment roughly 325 ICU or ICU capable beds, but, through the additional measures taken since August last year, we can surge that through management of other demands on hospitals to 550 ICU capable beds.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: What did he think would happen when the day the recent nationwide lockdown was announced, Auckland ICU was already at 120 percent occupancy, and how then were they expected to cope with the current outbreak when he has failed to build a single new resourced bed for them in the past year?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: The member is not providing an accurate picture by any stretch at all. If the member looked at the availability of ICU—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member’s all right as he goes, but he’s getting very close to making an inappropriate accusation of the member. So I’m just warning Mr Little to take care in his response.

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I’m obliged, Mr Speaker. The member’s assertion is incorrect. In terms of ICU capable beds available across Auckland at the commencement of the outbreak, there were differing levels of availability of ICU capacity between the three DHBs in Auckland. If the member’s concern is about facilities in our hospitals, and in light of the member’s party’s promises today about $3 billion spending, I just say this to this member: no one will believe that party, because, as we know, prior conduct is the best indicator of future conduct, and this tells the story. [Holds up graph] The amount of spending by that member’s Government on facilities in hospitals: $1 billion over nine years; $4.5 billion by this Government in three years. No one believes that member’s party when they say they’re interested in building hospital facilities.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: What potential impact would wholesale reopening of the border this side of Christmas have on our ICU facilities?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I know that there are differing models that have been coming forward from the various modellers, but at a vaccination level of between 70 and 75 percent of our population, the demand for services on our hospitals because of the unvaccinated population would be heavy and considerable and would place undue demand on our hospital system. That is why maximising our vaccination level is absolutely critical and taking appropriate measures, realistic and practical measures, to lift our capacity is very important.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: How is it possible that according to his answer to written question No. 42142, his health officials did not prepare a single report or make a single recommendation about ICU capacity at any time this year until five weeks ago when the latest outbreak was already under way?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: As I’ve said to that member many times, the work on lifting our ICU capacity started last year, in light of the outbreaks last year. That led to additional investment in ventilators, so we now have roughly 700 intensive care - capable ventilators. It also led to the programme to upskill our nursing workforce so that we now have an additional 1,400 nurses capable of working in an ICU environment. You know, it would be nice if that member acknowledged for once that his party, when it was in Government, did absolutely nothing to lift capability and capacity in the health system, and we are busily filling the gap.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: Is he one of the reasons for Auckland being stuck in a prolonged lockdown, because he failed to build a single new resourced ICU bed in Auckland over the past year?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: No. This Government has taken extraordinary steps since August last year to increase our ICU capacity and capability. If the member wants to point a finger of blame, look at his colleagues and ask himself what he was doing when he sat in that caucus when for two years in a row not a single dollar was appropriated to hospital facilities. Shame on that member.

Question No. 7—Arts, Culture and Heritage

7. to the Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage: What recent announcement has she made about support for the arts and culture sector?

on behalf of the Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage: Today, we announced a targeted relief package to support the arts and culture sector. The Government has brought forward $37.5 million from within the COVID Recovery Programme. This will span across protecting jobs and supporting at-risk organisations, key infrastructure, artists, sole traders, creatives, and projects, as well as a future-focused fund aimed at providing confidence for future performances and events. The package we’ve announced recognises that something more immediate is needed. We’ve worked with the sector to identify what the needs are, and now we’re delivering for them.

💬 Willow-Jean Prime: Why is this support important for the arts and culture sector?

On behalf of the Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage: the arts and culture sector have been hit hard, so we are supporting them as we have done with other sectors. They continue to be an engine of growth in innovation, helping to fuel our economy. The support announced today underlines the economic value of the arts, given the sector contributed $10.8 billion to New Zealand’s GDP in 2019 and has created more than 92,000 jobs. Today’s announcement is about protecting people’s jobs, incomes, and the livelihoods of those who make a living from delivering arts and cultural experiences here in Aotearoa.

💬 Willow-Jean Prime: How can people in the sector access the support?

On behalf of the Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage: people will be able to access targeted relief through entities such as Creative New Zealand, the New Zealand Film Commission, the New Zealand Music Commission, and Te Papa/Museums Aotearoa. The Cultural Sector Emergency Relief Fund will open on 1 October and can be found on Manatū Taonga’s website. It is intended to be a last resort fund for organisations and sole traders. The support is there, and I wholly endorse the sector to tap on in to it.

Question No. 8—COVID-19 Response

8. to the Minister for COVID-19 Response: Does he stand by all of the Government’s statements and actions responding to COVID-19?

Yes. The Government’s pragmatic response to a one-in-100-year shock has ultimately been focused on protecting the health and wellbeing of New Zealanders. Going hard and early has given New Zealand valuable options that other countries have missed out on, and it’s meant that New Zealanders have lived some of the least restrictive lives anywhere on the planet over the last year and a half. Our response has also given us the space to look ahead, allowing us to do the necessary work behind our planned, phased approach to reopening our borders safely early next year. We’ve already announced some of the details of that back in August, and we’ll continue to share more details with New Zealanders soon.

💬 Chris Bishop: Does he agree with the Prime Minister that the managed isolation and quarantine (MIQ) system is not a lottery?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Some elements of the MIQ system do have a degree of chance associated with them, but for those with an urgent and pressing need to travel, they can access emergency allocations; for those who have very significant national interest reasons to travel, there is an allocation of space for that as well. There are allocations of space for, for example, critical workforces that we need to get into the country, like our Recognised Seasonal Employer workers, and so on. So the latest system, I think, is fairer—the lobby system is fairer—than the system that existed before, where there was an even greater degree of luck associated with it. [Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Order! The pair of you.

💬 Chris Bishop: Will he allow fully vaccinated Kiwis in Queensland to return to New Zealand before Christmas without going into MIQ, and, if not, why not?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: What we have indicated—I think it was about two weeks ago, we indicated that we have Australia on about an eight-week cycle, so, yes, there will be further reviews of trans-Tasman travel this side of Christmas.

💬 Chris Bishop: When, if ever, will the Government allow businesses operating under level 3 conditions in Auckland to use rapid COVID tests to help protect their staff and the wider community?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The Ministry of Health are doing quite a lot of testing around rapid antigen testing at the moment. We haven’t made further decisions on where or when or how they may be deployed in the future.

💬 Chris Bishop: Will he rule out reopening New Zealand to the world along the lines of the reconnection strategy given by the Prime Minister in August, at a level below 90 percent vaccination coverage, which seems to be the Government’s aim?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: As I’ve always indicated to the member—and the fact is, every Minister has said this, including the Prime Minister—we haven’t set hard and fast vaccination targets. Our goal is to make sure as many New Zealanders as possible get vaccinated. Ninety percent is a good thing to aim for, it is a good thing to strive for, but we’ve not set hard and fast targets.

Question No. 9—Health

9. to the Minister of Health: What recent announcements has he made on support for youth mental wellbeing?

Today I announced that this Government has increased its targeted mental health and investment for rainbow young people, taking the total amount of funding past our manifesto commitment to $4.6 million. This package consists of $3.2 million for primary mental health and addiction services for rainbow young people across the motu, awarded to RainbowYOUTH and InsideOUT Kōaro; an $800,000 top-up to the Rule Foundation’s Rainbow Wellbeing Legacy Fund; and $600,000 to deliver rainbow competency training to mental health and addiction workforces.

💬 Glen Bennett: What will this funding mean for rainbow young people’s mental wellbeing?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: We know the rainbow community is more at risk and likely to experience poorer mental health and wellbeing, discrimination, harassment, and bullying than the general population, and this is of course unacceptable. This funding is to support projects, activities, and rainbow organisations to improve mental health outcomes for future generations of rainbow communities. RainbowYOUTH can now extend its peer support service nationwide, and InsideOUT can expand its support service from 200 to 300 schools. Upskilling and supporting the mental health and addiction workforce will equip them to better respond to the needs of the rainbow community. The Rule Foundation has also approved grants to 12 initiatives to help people, including Māori takatāpui and Pacific peoples; Indian, ethnic, and migrant communities; transgender, non-binary, intersex people; faith and independent rainbow tradespeople.

💬 Glen Bennett: What other announcements has he made on support for youth mental wellbeing?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: On Monday I announced that more than 20 community-led projects received a funding boost through the Youth Mental Wellbeing Fund to keep doing the important work that they do. I’m also very pleased that the fund, which was brought forward due to the Delta outbreak, was increased from an initial $1 million to $1.4 million because of the number of quality applications received. We’ve learnt from previous lockdowns that they are particularly challenging for young people, so we moved quickly to make sure these supports could keep being there in their time of need. I might also add I’m very thankful for the support of our cooperation partner, the Green Party, in these initiatives.

Question No.10—Children

10. NICOLE McKEE (ACT) on behalf of to the Minister for Children: Is the wellbeing and best interests of the child or young person the first and paramount consideration of Oranga Tamariki, and does he believe that Oranga Tamariki has placed the wellbeing of the child before all other considerations in its actions?

To the first part, it should always be yes. To the second part, no.

💬 Nicole McKee: Is it Oranga Tamariki’s policy to reverse uplift children who have been placed in loving, safe, and stable families because of cultural factors?

It’ll be Oranga Tamariki’s policy to prevent children from going into State care in the first place.

💬 Nicole McKee: Does he believe Oranga Tamariki has placed the wellbeing of the child first if it seeks to reverse uplift of a Māori child because a family couldn’t meet the child’s cultural needs when a psychological report found it would be “extremely disruptive to her and could have significant long-lasting implications in terms of mental health”; if so, why, Minister?

It depends on a child’s circumstances. Like I say, the first move should be to prevent children going into State care in the first place. If they need to go into State care, then they should be, in my opinion, with whānau second. If there is no loving, caring family that is of their whānau, then any loving, caring whānau is what is in the best interests of the children.

💬 Nicole McKee: Does he believe that Oranga Tamariki placed the wellbeing of the child first where a judge in a recent case stated that staff were driven “more by ideology than workable child-centred outcomes”; if so, why?

I have said that mistakes have been made and when mistakes have been made that Oranga Tamariki needs to fess up and fix things.

💬 Nicole McKee: Does he agree with the statement from a judge who ruled against Oranga Tamariki in a recent case that the judgment of Oranga Tamariki staff “was influenced by a view that, regardless of all other facts and principles, Māori children must be with Māori caregivers”; if not, why not?

Because that particular case hasn’t yet ended—there’s still work to be done around that—I’d rather not comment on the judge’s decision.

Question No. 11—Immigration

11. to the Minister of Immigration: Does he stand by his statement that he is “confident that the border exception is meeting the needs in terms of the flow of critical health workers in”; if so, how many of the critical health workers who have been able to come into New Zealand since the border closed in March 2020 were intensive care nurses?

Yes, because critical health workers are, by some distance, the largest group of workers we’ve been able to bring across the border since we closed it to protect the health of New Zealanders in March of last year. As I told the House yesterday, we’ve been able to bring 7,000 critical workers, health workers, and their dependants into the country since August of last year and a further 7,000 in the period from March to August of last year to support our health system in the context of a global pandemic. This includes intensive care nurses, but, as I’ve told Parliament, Immigration New Zealand does not distinguish between nursing specialisations. If an applicant is a nurse, then they meet the Immigration system’s threshold for receiving a border exception and coming to New Zealand to support our efforts.

💬 Nicola Willis: How is it that in a global pandemic, when we are so critically short of ICU nurses, the Minister does not know nor collect information about how many ICU nurses have entered New Zealand?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: I think I’ve already addressed some of that question, and I think my colleague, the Minister of Health, also pointed out why we are facing such a critical shortage of ICU workers. I’d also acknowledge that our solution to the problem isn’t one that the previous National Government took when we had skill shortages, and that was bringing all of that skill into the country. We have made efforts over the last 18 months to put in resources to train additional ICU nurses, which places us at about 1,400 ICU nurses fully trained at the moment, and a little over 700 trained for surge capacity, if required.

💬 Nicola Willis: Is it then the case that Immigration New Zealand leaves it to chance that some of the nurses entering New Zealand might be ICU trained?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: No, we don’t leave it to chance. We have a broad critical health border exception, which has allowed 14,000 people over the last 18 months—[Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Order! I’m trying to hear.

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: It is the role of DHBs to identify what shortages of skills in terms of the number of nursing roles that it might need and to attract them, and it’s the role of the Government to make sure there’s a streamlined process in order for that to happen.

💬 Nicola Willis: When he said yesterday: “Instead of taking a sector by sector approach”, does he not think it would be reasonable to specifically prioritise targeting ICU nurses through the immigration system, given we are in a global pandemic; and, if not, why not?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: I will repeat: we have given a broad border exception for critical health workers so DHBs and other health organisations that need to bring workers in have the ability to bring in whatever skill they need. As I mentioned, we do face a worker shortage. Some of that is because of the catch-up work needed to be done because of decisions that the previous Government did not make. And I’d also point towards the efforts that I’ve mentioned before: by making sure we have additional New Zealand nurses trained to work in ICU units, which has given us a little over 700 more nurses available to deal with surge capacity, if required.

💬 Nicola Willis: Will the new “2021 one-off residency visa for all migrant workers”, uploaded briefly today on Immigration New Zealand’s website, prioritise residency for critical healthcare workers?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: That member will have to wait for that decision. I believe someone may have got little trigger happy at Immigration New Zealand. But when the Government is ready to announce that, we will. As I said yesterday, it will be comprehensive and give certainty to both employers and migrants.

💬 Nicola Willis: I seek leave to table a document that is not publicly available anymore, and that is a page from the Immigration New Zealand website, which refers to a 2021 one-off residency—

💬 SPEAKER: All right, all right. I think the member described it fairly well earlier on. Is there any objection to that document being tabled? There is objection.

Question No. 12—Local Government

12. to the Minister of Local Government: Xiexie, Mr Speaker. What feedback has she received in relation to the Three Waters Reform Programme?

Xiexie, Mr Speaker. I’ve received vigorous feedback, as was anticipated at the beginning of the eight-week consultation period. During this time, the Department of Internal Affairs, Local Government New Zealand, and I have held over 150 engagements with councils, iwi Māori, the water industry, and other stakeholders. Almost all parties agree that the status quo is unworkable. Despite some much-publicised discontent, I am pleased with the number of councils, iwi, and other stakeholders who have engaged on the substance of the reforms and worked constructively to address several community concerns, such as governance arrangements, meaningful local voice, demonstrable consumer benefits, and broader local government roles and responsibilities. As part of this, I’ve signalled that areas like governance arrangements can continue to be worked on. It’s a critical aspect to get right, and I’m making sure we do. Many iwi I’ve spoken with about these reforms welcome the opportunities presented to advance their relationship with local government to develop local kaimahi in this industry and see future services that uphold te mana o te wai.

💬 Dr Emily Henderson: Is it possible to achieve the stated benefits of the Three Waters Reform Programme through scale and aggregation?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Yes, and there are other benefits, too. Scale and aggregation provide for dedicated focus on water service delivery by professional, competent boards and a dedicated water infrastructure workforce, and it enables performance benchmarking between entities of a similar scale. Aggregation at this nationwide level also provides a strong platform for the inclusion of economic regulation that can see further efficiencies across the system. It also positions entities strongly to fund the significant investment we need in water infrastructure while making it easier for Taumata Arowai and regional councils to do their jobs in enforcing drinking-water quality and environmental regulations. Our goals are reliable drinking water, improved environmental outcomes, economic growth, and job creation, and by meeting these, we help tackle some significant wider issues: building more houses, climate change, and natural disaster resilience.

💬 Dr Emily Henderson: Has a regional model, as some councils have advocated for, been considered as an option?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: That’s a great question. Yes, this was considered. A regional model means that some regions, particularly our more sparsely populated regions and smaller communities, would face either an unaffordable and unsustainable investment requirement or further deterioration in the quality of drinking water, waste water, and stormwater. This is not acceptable to our Government. We cannot support a model that only looks after urban areas. Approximately one in 20 people receive drinking water that didn’t comply with bacterial standards. The challenges in delivering clean, healthy water that does not contaminate our beaches are experienced across the country, from our smallest towns to our largest urban centres. Even the local government sector’s own analysis has concluded that a more regionalised model is not financially sustainable and does not provide the nationwide health or environmental benefits we’re seeking. In Otago-Southland, as an example, their own advisers concluded that the challenges in addressing the ongoing service delivery requirements for three waters will likely exceed the capacity of Otago and Southland as a combined region. On the West Coast, independent advisers reached the same conclusion.

💬 Dr Emily Henderson: Is she aware of the Auckland Council’s claim that they would not benefit from three waters reform, and, if so, has she tried to work through these concerns with the council?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: I am aware of the mayor’s claims and I have engaged with him and the council on a number of occasions to work through their concerns. While I accept that Auckland has had some 10 years of experience of a level of aggregation under the Watercare council-controlled organisation model, it is not a perfect option for the rest of the country. Auckland Council is near the limits of its debt capacity, and one of the significant constraints for Watercare is a tied balance sheet to Auckland Council. To prove a point, in the next five years, Auckland ratepayers, under the status quo, are looking at a twofold increase in rates, while also deferring large numbers of three waters infrastructure projects. This would be unnecessary under our proposed reforms. The Auckland Council’s desire for proportionate control over entity A would mean that the balance sheet separation from the council and the consequent ability to raise debt to fund its infrastructure deficit would not be achieved without significant long-term commitment to underwrite the entity by the Crown. The whole premise of the reform approach is to move asset debt and liabilities to these multi-regional entities who can leverage from greater scale to fund long-term asset management and infrastructure investment.

💬 Hon Eugenie Sage: When the Minister said yesterday that “Doing nothing is simply not an option.”, why does she regard a pause, as requested by many councils to enable discussion and further consideration of issues such as entity size, governance options, and stronger community and council engagement in decision making, as doing nothing, instead of partnership in action?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Because I’ve given and undertaken to work with the sector around a partnership-in-action model, which enables us to work through the governance arrangements that have already been foreshadowed prior to the eight-week consultation and have been amplified in relation to the feedback. There are a number of other areas that I have noted in this House that will continue to be able to be worked through with the reform programme that I’m proposing.

Point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek leave to table a letter that I wrote on 13 July, not in the public domain, to Mayor Goff outlining a detailed response to the issues raised by Auckland Council regarding the three waters reform proposals.

Is there any objection to that document being tabled? There is none. That may be tabled.

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