Oral Questions

1. to the Minister of Immigration: Is he confident that Immigration New Zealand can process the 2021 Resident Visa applications of up to 165,000 migrants within 12 months; if so, what does Immigration New Zealand plan to do differently to avoid creating a significant backlog?

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. Yes, because the criteria for the 2021 resident visa are clear and easy to assess. This will ensure Immigration New Zealand can manage the expected large volume of applications on a timely basis. Processing these applications will be a priority for Immigration New Zealand. Furthermore, the applications will be submitted online and will still be able to be processed by immigration officers anywhere in New Zealand should alert level restrictions be a factor. I will be taking a proactive approach in ensuring expectations around processing are met.

💬 Dr James McDowall: Will he be setting performance targets for Immigration New Zealand and telling the public what “majority of applications to be granted within a year” actually means?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: When documents are released, it will show that around 80 percent of applications should be processed within 12 months of the application tranches opening, so that is somewhat better than the wait times that have been in place for some time. Again, I assure the member that I will be taking a proactive approach in ensuring that the expectations that have been set are met.

💬 Dr James McDowall: What does the Minister say to the thousands of skilled migrants such as doctors, teachers, nurses, and their employers who have recently left New Zealand due to having no pathway to residency and being split from their families?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: We acknowledge that the issues that have been created by our closed border and uncertainty with pathways to residence have caused some people to make some extremely difficult decisions. I would balance that to the 165,000 people today who woke up to a clear pathway to residence because of their contribution to New Zealand over the last three years, the skilled work that they’re undertaking, or the scarce skills that they are offering to New Zealand at the moment.

💬 Dr James McDowall: Does the Minister now admit that the Government’s immigration reset announced in May has been a total disaster?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: The obvious answer there is no. What I do think is a success is the fact that the Government has taken a comprehensive approach to ensuring that skilled workers, settled workers, and scarce workers can now stay in New Zealand and build a future for them and their families, and also the employers who have concerns about their workers being able to maintain jobs in New Zealand can rest easy. I thank the member for his late-night posts last night helping me get the word out. I see his party has moved its priorities on to making sure that Britney Spears is free.

💬 Dr James McDowall: Why did it take the Minister so long to sort this out?

💬 Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern: Because it’s 165,000 people.

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: Thank you very much, Prime Minister—my words exactly: 165,000 people now have a clear pathway to residence. It is a comprehensive solution to problems that businesses currently face because of the COVID pandemic. We are very proud that a comprehensive solution such as this has been able to be met and it’s giving the certainty to 165,000 migrant workers that they have been wanting.

Question No. 2—Health

2. to the Minister of Health: Kia orana, Mr Speaker. What recent reports has he seen on the implementation of the Budget 2019 mental health package?

Last Friday, the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet’s (DPMC) Implementation Unit released their mid-term review of the landmark $1.9 billion investment this Government has made in the mental health system in 2019. I’m pleased to say that the report found most of the initiatives funded by the Government are on track to be completed by 2023-24. The report’s findings are an enormous credit to those working at the coalface of mental health and in the support agencies, including the Ministry of Health. In fact, just one item I can report progress on is that we have added 663 fulltime-equivalent front-line roles in just the last two years. However, no one should underestimate the challenge in building up from an incredibly low base. There is a long way to go to have the sort of mental health system that New Zealanders expect and deserve.

💬 Tangi Utikere: What are some of the key findings in that report?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: Some of the key findings are, firstly, that the Mental Health and Wellbeing Commission is now fully operational, more than 200 GP sites are now offering integrated primary mental health and addiction services to more than 11,000 people a month and providing coverage for an enrolled population of 1.5 million Kiwis, telehealth capacity has been increased by 58,000 contacts a year, 18 services tailored for young people are fully or partially operational across 14 DHB areas, and front-line staffing has increased across New Zealand, including in the regions encompassing hospital emergency departments, services to mothers and their whānau, and forensic mental health. There is much more in the report and much more to do, and I would encourage all members to read it on the DPMC website.

💬 Tangi Utikere: Did the report identify any areas for improvement?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: Yes. When it comes to infrastructure, the Ministry of Health has struggled to achieve as much as this Government would have liked. We’ve taken immediate steps to address that finding in the report. That compares to the complete failure of investment by the previous Government in any health infrastructure at all. The Ministry of Health, however, can now provide DHBs with funding for the planning, design, and consenting of infrastructure projects so they can be fast-tracked. An assurance group chaired by Professor Judy McGregor and including those with lived experience has now been established to oversee the implementation of the rest of the programme. We’re also simplifying overall infrastructure planning. Ultimately, like in so many parts of the health system, this is what happens when there is a sustained under-investment in health infrastructure for nine long years, including not one cent being invested in 2015 or 2016.

💬 Matt Doocey: When the Minister championed the increase of mental health workers, what did his independent review say about the 40 percent of mental health workers who had resigned—from 634 a year to 875—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order!

💬 Matt Doocey: —over the last three years?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: There is no question that in the health sector generally there are major workforce challenges, and that is because, as I have told this House before, for 10 years the previous Government turned its back on the health sector, failed to invest, failed to support, neglected every major health issue that this country faced, and this Government is now cleaning up the mess.

💬 Matt Doocey: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I asked what the report said.

💬 SPEAKER: And the member added extraneous material to it, and therefore I’m not going to push the Minister to be more exact.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Point of order. In respect of extraneous material, I wonder if you could check the last two answers to supplementary questions, when you get a chance, for their compliance with Standing Orders 396(2)(a) and (b)?

💬 SPEAKER: I’m happy to check and I will do that. But I will sort of remind the member that when there are political questions asked, there is likely to be that sort of response.

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 this Government’s decision to offer a one-off resident visa for skilled, for settled, and for scarce migrants currently in New Zealand. This change gives certainty to many of our migrant families who have been in New Zealand through the pandemic, and it will provide certainty to New Zealand businesses so they can better plan for the future. It’s estimated that this includes 5,000 health- and aged-care workers, 9,000 primary industry workers, and more than 800 teachers. These are members of our team of 5 million and they’ve played an important role for our country, and now they can have the certainty they need to continue their lives here in Aotearoa New Zealand.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: At what vaccination rate will fully vaccinated Kiwis returning home from low-risk countries be able to self-isolate at home?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: There’s two stages to us moving to a model like that. The first is the use of the self-isolation pilot which, as the member will know, we announced this week, which trials the use of self-isolation for double-vaccinated New Zealand citizens travelling abroad. The second area where we’re looking to modify our border settings is the use of shortened isolation periods. We’re looking to draw on data from overseas countries as to the safe exit point for shortened managed isolation and quarantine (MIQ). On both those fronts, we’re looking to use those varied border settings from the first quarter of 2022, in keeping with our reconnecting New Zealand strategy, based on the public health advisory work of Professor David Skegg.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Why has her Government not delivered purpose-built MIQ facilities outside of the central business districts 18 months into this pandemic?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Well, obviously, we do have managed isolation facilities who do sit outside of those areas, and we’ve found that some of the ones that we’ve used throughout the pandemic have been very successful—one of which is the Jet Park, which has been our primary managed quarantine facility and has worked well. One thing I would acknowledge is that regardless of where they’re placed, what matters is also where you draw your primary source of workforce from, and so the proximity to airports matters but also proximity to workforce. So having facilities that—yes—meet all of the standards you need around ventilation and so on is important, but you also do need rigorous tests in place to ensure that the workforce continue to be safe, because they will live in proximity and around communities, which presents risk. So, all up, we’ve used facilities quickly that we’ve been able to access and lease. We are saying that we will vary up, potentially, whether we purchase those, going forward. We are exploring whether or not in the future it would warrant having additional purpose-built. But, as I’ve just said, we’re now trialling things like self-isolation and shortened MIQ, so there will be a change to the way we use MIQ in the future.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: When will booster shots be available for those people in group 1 who received their vaccine over seven months ago?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: When our experts advise us that that is a space that they recommend us moving into. You’ll see that—yes—some countries have made decisions for older individuals or immunocompromised individuals, but this is still quite a hotly contested space. What’s important for us in the meantime is to preserve our position to do that. If our experts advise us we should, we are all ready to go. We do have additional vaccines that we would have available in the first half of next year, in part due to the fact that for five- to 11-year-olds, should they be granted in New Zealand the authorisation to be vaccinated, a paediatric dose is a third of—at this stage—an adult dose. That gives us extra quantity, and also the shelf life for our current Pfizer vaccines, which we’ll have surplus of, is now nine months rather than four. So we will have additional capacity for booster shots, should that be recommended.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Does the goal of the current Auckland lockdown remain elimination?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: As I’ve said many times before, our strategy all the way through has been a “stamp it out” strategy—a zero tolerance for COVID cases—but that does not mean we will have zero, and so we have said all the way through that we maintain that strategy while we are vaccinating New Zealanders.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Did the Prime Minister just indicate that when vaccination rates are high enough, she will not be maintaining an elimination strategy?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I’ve actually said many, many times that we intend to move away from the alert level system that has often had to use restrictions in alert levels 3 and 4 in order to maintain a “stamp it out” strategy. So we’ve always said that with a vaccinated environment, you wear your individual armour. It means that you don’t have to isolate yourself away from COVID in order to maintain a strategy of stamping out COVID-19. It’s often been others who have interpreted elimination to be something more like eradication; that has not been us.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Does she then agree with University of Auckland epidemiologist Rod Jackson, who said today, that elimination is “always … a short-term strategy, but what Delta has done [has] made it much [more] shorter-term”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I actually really wish the member perhaps would engage in some of the dialogue that we’ve been having daily with New Zealand on this very point. We’ve long said that the reason that we’re maintaining this strategy in Auckland right now is because we need to vaccinate New Zealanders. Once you are vaccinated, New Zealanders, you have the ability to change the way that you deal with outbreaks substantively, and so that is what we have been saying for quite some time. But, for now, we continue to operate in Auckland with very clear public health protocols, isolating cases, and using the heavy restrictions that we have because we do not have a fully vaccinated population.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Can the Prime Minister confirm that New Zealand has over a long period of time maintained an elimination strategy for a range of infectious diseases where vaccination is available and has been widely taken up by New Zealanders, without the need for alert level escalations and border restrictions?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Yes, and some of those tools are the ones that you’re seeing so widely in use now. Public health units have the ability, for instance, for even the management of flu to shut down some health facilities, if they need to. For the measles, they use contact tracing alongside other tools. But I guess the point that I would again make, referring back to the last member’s question, is a number of health professionals have been talking about the extra capacity the vaccine gives you to change the way that you deal with outbreaks, as have we.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Does she agree with epidemiologist Dr Rod Jackson and Professor Shaun Hendy, who today agreed: “Auckland is going to be in level 3 until we don’t have mystery cases”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The judgments that we make around the movement of restrictions we base on the public health assessments that come through from the Ministry of Health. What I have said today is that there are a range of analyses that we’ll make to different restrictions, and consider whether or not those can be eased safely, and that’s the same consideration we make every time when we look at our alert level framework: what can we do safely to ensure that we maintain control of the outbreak that currently exists in Auckland?

Question No. 4—Local Government

4. to the Minister of Local Government: Does she stand by her comment on Three Waters that “the case for change is [well-made], compelling … and needs to be [understood]”; if so, what steps will she take to ensure feedback over the last eight weeks will be considered?

💬 SPEAKER: Just before the Minister starts her answer, we seem to have an extra member, or some confusion, at the back of the House. Thank you.

Xiexie, Mr Speaker. Yes, there is near universal agreement that the status quo is not sustainable. Our three waters assets are now liabilities, and we need to position the system in a way where they are best placed to enable an estimated $120 billion to $180 billion investment needed over 30 years. Without action, the situation for councils and communities is only going to get worse. Over the past eight weeks, I’ve received considerable feedback from councils which has included a wide range of issues such as governance arrangements, accountability and performance expectations, ensuring assets remain in public ownership, maintaining local voice, especially in smaller areas, and that consumer ratepayer benefits must be demonstrated. These are important topics, and I’m committed to keeping the conversation going on how we progress the reforms in a way that respects the views represented from councils on behalf of their communities. In particular, I’m alert to the concerns that positive, effective relationships councils have built with partners like iwi and business with regards to water are important and should not be lost in the process of reform. Indeed, such relationships should enhance this process.

💬 Angie Warren-Clark: What core challenges of the reform proposal need to be understood by councils and the public?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Even with the best of intentions, the scale of the three waters challenge is too big for any one council to come up with a solution that can respond to a high-standards regime with comprehensive compliance, monitoring, and enforcement. Taumata Arowai, the dedicated drinking-water regulator, will ensure comprehensive implementation of health and environmental standards. That’s why this reform is not simply tinkering around the edges. It fundamentally addresses the long-term under-investment in waters infrastructure that will provide a more financially sustainable and resilient waters infrastructure network and will deliver vastly improved health and environmental benefits. Leveraging balance sheets at this level will give greater certainty to communities that their rates will be going to a higher-quality water network than what is currently the case. This approach, ultimately, is about the wellbeing of people, the community, and the environment, and the long-term economic growth of regions.

💬 Angie Warren-Clark: Why is a nationwide, all-in model the best approach to address the significant affordability challenges for infrastructure investment?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: I’ve consistently said that my preferred approach is to enable all communities within New Zealand to access the benefits of reform. As I’ve said before in this House, the Government cannot accept a solution for the three waters challenge that works for cities and leaves smaller towns and regions facing the same issues as they are now. In practice, a nationwide, all-in approach would require every territorial authority district to be included in the new water services entities. Several councils have raised concerns about cross-subsidising their neighbours, but an all-in approach means greater efficiencies for all councils and ratepayers through better capital asset management and more professional workforce procurement practices, innovation, and service delivery, and improved services at a more affordable cost to consumers and ratepayers.

💬 Barbara Kuriger: How many more councils, like Taupō and Timaru, need to unequivocally oppose the three waters reforms before the Minister admits that she will force the reforms on the councils?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: It may be good enough for that member to raise how many people oppose, but the simple fact of the matter is that lot on that side of the House have no credible alternative. This issue has been around for a very, very long time, but let me explain: this hasn’t emerged overnight, this challenge for three waters. We have the advantage of a great deal of analysis from a wide range of sources, including from the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, in their report that was tabled in the year 2000—and nothing was done. Also the Land and Water Forum in 2010—and nothing was done—the Auditor-General in 2017 and, again, in 2018, and many councils’ own reports, not to mention the recently commissioned reports under the tenure of this Government. It cannot be left to chance; something must be done. It is a challenging issue. At least on this side of the House, we are dealing with the serious issues that will underpin long-term regional economic growth, while that side of the House has no credible alternative.

Question No. 5—Health

5. to the Minister of Health: Why didn’t he add any new resourced ICU beds in Auckland in the year before the current outbreak, and what recommendations about ICU capacity, if any, were included in the two recent models he identified in his answer to written question No. 42142?

Significant work has been undertaken since March 2020 to provide for surge ICU capacity across the Auckland region and provide for longer-term security. Of the metro Auckland DHBs, Waitematā has surge capacity up from eight ICU beds to 28 and Counties Manukau up from 24 to 40, so the member’s assertion in his question is, in fact, wrong. To the second part of the question, my answer to written question No. 42142 described percentage models developed by specialists working in two DHBs that are not in Auckland. I’m advised that the models pertained to scenario planning for if New Zealand’s borders were opened and that neither model contained explicit recommendations. When considering models, it’s important to recognise that not all COVID-19 patients need to be in ICU or on a ventilator. The best way to keep people out of ICU in any model or under any scenario is to have as many eligible New Zealanders vaccinated as possible, and that is what we are trying to achieve.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: What in-patient procedures are not undertaken under the surge model that he has just described for ICUs?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I’m not quite sure what surge model the member is referring to, except to say that when there is an outbreak there is necessarily disruption to health services. If it is contained and local, that disruption can be confined to the particular hospital or hospitals in that region. If it is more widespread, then other hospitals may be affected. The reality is in the response to a pandemic such as we have seen, when there is a risk or a reasonably high probability that there will be a high number of admissions to hospital and to ICUs, hospitals clear their planned care lists so that both space, or beds, and personnel are available to provide the care that is needed.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: Does he agree it would have been prudent to use the past 16 months to add at least some persistent ICU beds in our largest city, given there is a global pandemic?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: Well, that is in fact what has happened, and if you have a look at what Waitematā, for example, has done and what Counties Manukau has done, they have created extra standing ICU capacity for their hospitals. Other DHBs have done the same again. But the preparation that has happened since the end of last year, having reflected on last year’s lockdowns, is to make sure that across our hospital network there is additional capacity that can be brought on at short notice and additional surge capacity that can bring our ICU bed capacity to up to 550.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: Will he commit to adding at least one extra resourced ICU bed in Auckland in the next month?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: Well, that is already happening, because this is a Government that having reflected on what happened in the lockdowns last year and doing the work to prepare for the ongoing management of COVID-19, continues to support our health system to be prepared for the ongoing response to the pandemic, and when we get to the point of a highly vaccinated population and start relaxing the restrictions, including border restrictions, we will have a health system that is capable of responding to COVID wherever it turns up in New Zealand.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: When he said yesterday that prior conduct is the best indicator of future conduct, does this mean he plans to add no significant new standing ICU beds, given he hasn’t added any in the last 16 months?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: No. That was a comment in reference to the appalling conduct of the previous National Government and its absolute and utter failure to continue to invest in our public health system to keep New Zealanders safe, because what we know about National Governments is they just do not care about our public health system.

Question No. 6—Immigration

6. to the Minister of Immigration: What recent announcements has the Government made to provide certainty for temporary migrants and their employers?

This morning, the Government announced a one-off residency pathway to provide certainty to migrants and their employers. The 2021 resident visa will provide a one-off, simplified pathway to residents for around 165,000 migrants currently in New Zealand. We’re providing a way forward for our migrant families, who are being long disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic, while ensuring businesses have the certainty they need to plan into the future to continue driving the economic recovery. This is something employers have asked for and the Labour Government is delivering. Employers will now have the opportunity to retain their settled and skilled migrant workers, reflecting the critical part that they play in our economy, workforce, and in our communities.

💬 Jo Luxton: Who will be eligible for residence as a result of this announcement?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: The 2021 resident visa is available to applicants who have been in New Zealand on 29 September, yesterday, and must hold or have applied for one of the eligible work visas. They must also meet one of the criteria of either being settled in New Zealand for three years or more, being skilled so as to be earning over the median wage, or working in a role where workers are scarce. The visa will also be available for those who enter New Zealand as critical workers, and their families, for roles of six months or longer up until the end of July 2022. The member may want to know that 5,000 health- and aged-care workers are likely to be eligible, 12,000 manufacturing workers are likely to be eligible, 15,000 construction workers will be eligible, and I’m sure the member for Rangitata will want to know that 9,000 primary industry workers are likely to be eligible.

💬 Jo Luxton: Excellent. How is this announcement being received?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: Oh, well, I am aware of some reports of this announcement being relatively well-received, other than from the member of the ACT Party who asked question No. 1. The Employers and Manufacturers Association said, for example, that this is “the most significant immigration change in decades” and it will be welcomed by business and a relief for migrant workers and their families. BusinessNZ have also said, “Residency pathways for critical workers and their families recognise the significant contribution international workers have made to New Zealand during the pandemic.”, and we agree with them.

Question No. 7—Finance

7. to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement on the Government’s economic response to the August COVID-19 outbreak, “We do know that there will be businesses unfortunately who won’t make it through this, but we also know that the rebound on the other side has shown that the New Zealand economy does well when we get on top of this, and businesses come back”?

I stand by all the statements I made to the Finance and Expenditure Committee yesterday in their context. That context includes the $3.6 billion in support that has been provided to businesses, since this outbreak began, to give cash flow and confidence. I would also note the context that we have modified our support through the outbreak by increasing the amount paid for the wage subsidy scheme and making the Resurgence Support Payment a more regular payment. In addition, as I said yesterday, we know from the experience of last year that the approach that we have taken has seen the economy swiftly and emphatically rebound, and this means an environment that businesses operate in where they can rapidly improve and come back to profitability.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Does he agree that businesses that fail are not going to be able to bounce back?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As was noted, I believe, in March 2020 by myself and by the member’s predecessor in the finance portfolio for the National Party, it is the sad reality of a significant downturn or a significant disruption to business that some businesses will not make it through from there. But the overall resilience of the New Zealand business community has been seen throughout COVID-19 and I am confident in the context of the recovery we saw last year that we would see a similar one this time, and most businesses will do well in that.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Has he seen reports from Deloitte that the number of businesses seeking help more than doubled during this lockdown, and does he agree with David Webb’s prediction that things could become worse for many of those businesses?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I haven’t seen those particular reports, but what I do know is that the resilience of the New Zealand business community is strong. Many of them built up their balance sheets very well over the course of the last year, where economic conditions in New Zealand were far more favourable than the rest of the world, where we had far fewer days of restrictions. This doesn’t discount that it is a tough time for those businesses. What I would indicate to the member in terms of real-time information is we can say that there were 34 company liquidations last week compared to 21 for the same time last year and 27 for that week in 2019.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Is he going to revisit the level of support to businesses, given that it’s much more difficult for many customer-facing ones to survive under the current Delta alert level 2 restrictions than it was under the previous alert level 2 restrictions?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As I’ve said many times in this House, we constantly look at the support that we’re giving and update it as is appropriate. I would note for those who are in level 2 in New Zealand at the moment that we are operating under the level 2 restrictions as we’ve known them previously.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Does he accept that more support for business from the COVID-19 Response and Recovery Fund would’ve been a better investment than the $710 million paid from that fund to entice councils to support the Government’s three waters reforms?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Well, that comment from the member shows that he hasn’t actually looked very closely at what that funding was for. It was to support work to upgrade the water infrastructure of New Zealand and create jobs. Creating jobs is actually something that on this side of the House, we think it’s important, and it was a very important part of making sure that the New Zealand economy recovered. I should remind the member that when we went into lockdown last year, we were being told we would have double-digit unemployment in New Zealand. We didn’t: we’ve ended up with unemployment back at 4 percent. That, in part, is because of the investment made by this Government in supporting jobs.

Question No. 8—Conservation

8. to the Minister of Conservation: What recent announcements has she made regarding Jobs for Nature projects on the West Coast?

Great news for the West Coast because last week I announced a package of four Jobs for Nature projects across the West Coast, spanning business support, sustainable whitebait fisheries, restoration of the Arahura River, and tackling large-scale weed control. The projects represent an investment of almost $9 million into nature and the community, and are collectively expected to create 45 jobs and sustain up to 100 more.

💬 Rachel Boyack: How is Jobs for Nature supporting businesses in South Westland?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: Businesses in the heavily tourism-dependent area of South Westland have been supported by Jobs for Nature funding since July 2020 as part of the Sustaining the South Westland Community project. An additional $1.28 million has been committed to continue the support for the next two years, enabling 40 businesses to have their staff working on conservation projects throughout South Westland. This investment will continue to enable up to 100 people to remain in and contribute to their local South Westland communities through the impacts of COVID and it has already delivered 30,000 hours of conservation work spanning animal pest research, predator trap construction, surveys, weed control, and track maintenance.

💬 Rachel Boyack: How will this investment support a sustainable whitebait fishery on the West Coast?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: There is $1.36 million being provided to the Sustainable Wild Whitebait Fishery Project, which will be delivered by the West Coast Regional Council and is expected to create 13 jobs over the next two years. This project aims to improve whitebait spawning habitat by removing weeds from 25 streams and installing 13 kilometres of fencing along 18 rivers, estuaries, and lagoons. Alongside the Government’s announcement of pragmatic changes to whitebait regulations earlier this year, these efforts will improve the sustainability of a threatened species while ensuring that Coasters can continue the tradition of catching a feed in their local river into the future.

Question No. 9—COVID-19 Response

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

Yes, in particular the Government’s decision to keep New Zealanders safe from COVID-19 over the last year and a half. As we announced at the beginning of August, we’ve got a plan to reconnect New Zealanders with the world and help as many New Zealanders as possible to return home. It’s a plan that continues the careful and cautious approach to balance the risks that we face with making sure that New Zealand comes through this pandemic together. New Zealanders can be proud of the approach that they’ve taken to COVID-19 to date. It’s one that’s left us in the position of having one of the lowest mortality rates from COVID-19 in the world, one of the lowest hospitalisation rates from COVID-19 in the world, and one of the fewest days of restrictions of any country in the world, and, relative to other countries, our economy has held up remarkably well.

💬 Chris Bishop: Why did New Zealand only have a vaccination rate of 20 percent on 7 August, when Delta entered New Zealand?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Vaccine supply.

💬 Chris Bishop: Does he agree with the Prime Minister that—to quote her—“We have taken our rightful place in the delivery of vaccine.”, and does that indicate why New Zealand spent most of this year having the developed world’s slowest vaccine roll-out?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I’m not quite sure what the thrust of the member’s question is. New Zealand’s vaccine roll-out has accelerated rapidly as the supply of vaccines has been available to New Zealand. In fact, we have delivered, on a per capita per day basis, one of the highest rates of vaccination of any countries in the world.

💬 Chris Bishop: Does he regret saying last year that New Zealand would be at the front of the queue for COVID-19 vaccines in light of the fact that we have had for most of this year the developed world’s slowest vaccine roll-out?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: That is of course one of those comments that was made in a particular context, including the fact that at that point there were no vaccines available on the market at all and New Zealand had an advance purchase agreement for four different vaccines. If you take the fullness of the quote, which was that as vaccines come to the market New Zealanders towards the front of the queue have access to them, it was absolutely true. We had access to the Pfizer vaccine from February; it was in relatively small quantities at the beginning, though. But I’d also remind the members opposite that in their crystal-ball gazing, they were encouraging us to buy vaccines other than the Pfizer vaccine.

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: What does the Minister think would have been the consequence of the Government asking for vaccines to be given out before they’d been approved by our medical authorities?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Well, that is of course another one of the reasons why our vaccine roll-out was slower to start than some other countries. We made the decision not to use an emergency approval process but to make sure it was run through a regular, thorough approval process. When we made that decision, it is worth remembering that we were seeing research that suggested up to a third of New Zealanders were not willing to have the vaccine at that time. By taking a thorough and considered approach to the roll-out of the vaccine, we have reduced that number down to a much, much smaller number.

💬 Chris Bishop: At what point will this current lockdown—which was promised to be short and sharp—end?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I reject the assertion in the member’s question. Our goal with every lockdown, where we’ve had to do them, is to make them short and sharp, but we always have to respond to what the testing during the early stages of a lockdown shows us, and that shows us that this particular outbreak was already well under way for at least a week before it was first detected and that, of course, does have an impact on the overall level of restrictions that we have.

💬 Chris Bishop: Why is it still not mandatory for healthcare workers in COVID-19 work streams to be vaccinated against COVID-19 when many other countries did this months ago?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: One of the things that we have to bear in mind is that we need to keep our healthcare workers, and where there is a mandatory vaccination requirement put in place, you have to be willing for the fact that you might lose some of those workers who are unwilling to be vaccinated, and our health system is under a significant amount of pressure. We have found, as we found with our border workforce, that before moving to a mandatory vaccination requirement, it is best first to start with the “educate and encourage” approach, and you can get quite a high degree of the way there—potentially, a further way there—than if you start immediately at the mandatory vaccination - requirement end of the spectrum.

Question No. 10—Immigration

10. to the Minister of Immigration: Does he agree with the Green Party open letter sent to him in June that migrants need to have clear and achievable pathways to residency?

Can I thank the member for his letter of June. The letter itself included some measures that were aligned to the work we were already progressing on the 2021 resident visa and some others that were not. I do agree that providing temporary migrants with certainty over their future in New Zealand is a priority, and that is why the Government has announced a one-off residence pathway that will be available to up to 165,000 migrants. The visa will create a residence pathway for over 5,000 health- and aged-care workers, 9,000 primary industry workers, and more than 800 teachers. The Government is proud of this announcement. We’ve listened to calls from migrants and their employers, and I note the advocacy of the member.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: Does he agree with the Pacific Leadership Forum who, in their petition for pathways to residency, called for an amnesty for overstayers?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: I do acknowledge calls for action around overstayers. The Government has said that we will consider this alongside the wider rebalance of our immigration settings. I will note that with the residence visa announced today, around 5,000 people from the Pacific will be able to apply for it, and that’s what we forecast in terms of eligibility. We also acknowledge the work that we’ve done to open up a quarantine-free travel bubble in order to allow workers from the likes of Tonga, Samoa, and Vanuatu in terms of our commitment to the Pacific, and I also want to outline our commitment to the likes of the Samoan quota and Pacific access category, and when the borders are able to open more freely, our commitment to those quotas and a commitment to ensure that we backdate some of the capacity that we haven’t been able to have into New Zealand because of the border closures.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: Will the Government grant an age waiver under the one-off residency visa for migrants who are over the age of eligibility due to the processing backlog?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: If people have aged out because they have been in the queue, the answer to that question is yes. The other thing I want to note and point out around the first wave of applications, which start in December, is that anyone who has an expression of interest application in at the moment with a dependent child 17 years or over will also be prioritised. We understand the difficulties that those people are facing in terms of delays but also that they want certainty for their children if they are to be domestic, fee-paying students next year.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: Will he review the current health requirements that prevent people like Aisling Smyth, who has a mild multiple sclerosis diagnosis, from obtaining residency?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: I understand that both Immigration New Zealand and the Ministry of Health are undertaking a review of those settings at the moment. It hasn’t come to Ministers for a final sign-off yet, but I understand some of the concerns that have been raised around some of those settings.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: What is his message to people who have lived in Aotearoa for more than three years but are now stuck offshore due to the pandemic and may not qualify for the residency programme as a result of border closures through no fault of their own?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: I understand that because of the border closures, some people have been put in difficult positions. When you propose and announce a residence visa of the ilk that we have today, you do have to have some bounds in which to make people eligible. I think the fact that we’ve said to 165,000 people who are here in New Zealand already, contributing to our economy in our communities and becoming settled in those communities, and who have supported the economy in their communities over the last three years, and who have offered their skills or have scarce skills that we want to maintain in New Zealand, a new pathway to residence which is streamlined that is open to them for the next 10 months is a vast improvement on some of the concerns that they’ve had in recent months.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: Does the Government consider migrants earning less than $27 an hour unskilled and, therefore, ineligible for the one-off residency programme, and, if so, why?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: No, we don’t. The member will know that there are three kind of key criteria in terms of the residence visa that has been announced today: if people have been here three years, if they earn over the $27-an-hour mark, or if they are, in loose terms, scarce skilled labour. What we are saying to the 165,000 people that are eligible—an overwhelming number of people who are on temporary visas—is that we support you and your long-term future in New Zealand.

Question No. 11—Commerce and Consumer Affairs

Ni hao, Mr Speaker. Xiexie. My question is to the Minister of Immigration—oh sorry, the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs.

💬 Hon Kris Faafoi: Not another one!

💬 JAMIE STRANGE: We’ll give the Minister of Immigration a bit of a rest.

11. to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs: What reports has he seen on the benefits of Government changes to KiwiSaver?

Good news: the Financial Markets Authority (FMA) released its annual report this week and it highlights how the Government’s recent decisions are positively benefiting Kiwis. Here’s a few examples. The Government changed KiwiSaver settings in March to allow people with congenital life-shortening conditions such as Down syndrome, cerebral palsy, Huntington’s disease, and fetal alcohol spectrum disorder to withdraw their funds at the time that’s right for them. The annual report shows 14 people have so far taken up that opportunity. I also note that despite the COVID-19 pandemic, this report indicates an increase in overall KiwiSaver membership and an increase in members contributing to their accounts. KiwiSaver schemes now have over $81 billion in funds under management, and the average KiwiSaver balance was $26,410 as at 31 March 2021. Finally, I draw your attention to an article currently running on Stuff reporting ANZ is following BNZ, Westpac, and ASB in abolishing annual membership fees. That’s $18 a year it will no longer be charging its 650,000 KiwiSaver customers. Two days ago, the FMA slammed the membership fees in its report, saying there’s little justification for these fees to be charged by investment managers that have achieved scale. They know the regulator is watching. They know Government has asked default providers to sharpen their pencils, and now the market is clearly responding.

💬 SPEAKER: Right, and I’m going to rule that that question was far too long. I will allow one further supplementary.

💬 Jamie Strange: What further changes has he made that will benefit KiwiSaver members?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: Well, it is also good news. The default schemes take effect on 1 December this year—the changes that were announced earlier on—meaning that 356,000 New Zealanders will be significantly better off at retirement. That, as an illustration, means for someone, say, who’s 18 years old, earning $50,000 a year, and contributing 3 percent of their income to KiwiSaver, it’s estimated they’ll have an extra $143,000 when they reach 65, and they’ll also pay $3,900 less in fees over the course of that savings journey. These are the kinds of changes this Government is making to make sure that New Zealanders get more bang for their buck when it comes to KiwiSaver.

Question No. 12—Corrections

12. to the Minister of Corrections: Does he have confidence in the Department of Corrections?

on behalf of the Minister of Corrections: Yes.

💬 Rawiri Waititi: Is he aware of any inhumane treatment to the 16 inmates who protested at Waikeria, and are they being targeted?

If the member wanted answers to that particular area, he could have put that down in the primary question, and I’m sure the Minister would be willing to answer that in particular if it was.

💬 Rawiri Waititi: Can the Minister confirm that these 16 protesters have been targeted, again, with solitary confinement—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume his seat. The Minister made it very clear in his primary answer that he was not briefed on this specific matter, and Standing Orders and Speakers’ rulings are very clear that if a member wants answers to a specific question, then one doesn’t ask a general question in order to get there. I’ve interrupted the member, so he’s only used one of his supplementary questions, not two, because it would have been ruled out. The member will have another go at seeing if he can ask it in a way that is in order.

💬 David Seymour: Point of order. The Standing Orders and Speakers’ rulings say that the member may not be able to expect an answer, but what you’ve just said is he’s not allowed to ask the question, and surely that—I don’t know any Speaker’s ruling or Standing Order that says you can’t ask the question.

💬 SPEAKER: The member will resume his seat. I might be accused of coaching the member in order to attempt to help him get to the point where he can make a supplementary question where he can expect to get a useful answer. Now, this is a practice, I think it’s fair to say, that when I was in Opposition, I used to criticise the Hon Dr Lockwood Smith for doing—for doing some coaching while he was refereeing—but I think with a party with relatively new members and not the experience, I think in this particular case, me trying to be helpful shouldn’t be objected to by another party.

💬 Rawiri Waititi: This is harder than I thought, Mr Speaker, today.

💬 SPEAKER: So’s life, mate.

💬 Rawiri Waititi: This one’s supposed to be easy. For the Minister—he’s not even here—is he aware of any inhumane treatment of the protesters in Waikeria, and are they being targeted?

💬 SPEAKER: Oh well, I’ve tried to help the member, but it doesn’t matter. The Minister can answer.

I can’t answer the specifics of the question. What I can say is that the Minister expects the department to act legally in accordance with the law and the rules of corrections, and I can also say on his behalf that when he finds instances where that has not happened—for example, at Auckland’s women’s prison earlier in the year—he takes action.

💬 Rawiri Waititi: Can the Minister confirm that those who are being targeted, and, again, with solitary confinement, since being moved to Waikeria Prison, to multiple other prisons, including one protester who, reportedly, has been locked in his cell for up to 23 hours a day; if not, why not?

I can’t confirm that.

💬 Rawiri Waititi: I’ll throw the other two, Mr Speaker.

💬 SPEAKER: All right. That concludes oral questions.