Oral Questions

1. 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 announcement yesterday that vaccination will be required for all workers at businesses where customers need to show COVID-19 vaccination certificates, such as hospitality and close-contact businesses. I also stand by the Government’s announcement of a clearer and simplified risk assessment process for employers to follow when deciding whether they can require vaccinations for different types of work. To facilitate this, employers will be required to provide paid time off for workers to get vaccinated as well. This side of the House knows that in a pandemic, it is vital to have a clear, concise position on the use of vaccination certificates and on vaccine mandates.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Does she agree that Auckland is likely to be in level 3 lockdown for at least four more weeks; if not, how long?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I note that member has said that Auckland wouldn’t move into any changes under her plan until 1 December. What I would note is, actually, under the targets that we’ve set, there is the ability for Auckland to move, you know, potentially earlier if we see the double dose at 90 percent target reached by each DHB. As I’ve said, we’re now, I believe, roughly 10,000 first doses away, just under reaching that first dose target. Three weeks out from that, they’ll then likely be able to reach the second dose target.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: When will she travel to Auckland to see for herself the impact that 71 days of continuous lockdown is having on Aucklanders?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I take that as, therefore, support from the Opposition for me to be not present here for a time, because that has been one of my concerns. If I were to do that, I then run the risk of not being present in this House and available as I’m called upon to be available for the ongoing scrutiny of the press as well. It is something we’ve given consideration to. The one thing I would say is that, equally, I would need to make sure that I’m following all the rules in Auckland. Most of the meetings I’d likely engage in I’m doing remotely here as well with business organisations and our public health providers. But it is something that I’m looking at.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: When Auckland moves to the traffic light system, will the Auckland border be removed?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: As the member may have heard me say on Friday, the traffic light system itself doesn’t incorporate the use of hard borders. We see the hard border we have at the moment as being a reflection of the transition that we’re in presently. It is helping to prevent the wider spread to areas that are currently COVID-free, which is why we’re maintaining it, but it is not, in our view, something that in the longer term, when we’re all in the traffic light system, is likely to be part of our long-term future.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: How many weeks does she expect Tairāwhiti District Health Board—which is currently at 76 percent first dose—will take to reach 90 percent first dose?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I see that as of Tuesday, they are now at 77 percent. Of course, you have in that stat that it’s currently the DHB with the lowest first dose rate, but, of course, everyone in this House and, I think, all of us wish to see those vaccination rates move as quickly as possible. Some of the extra funding we are supplying but also extra support that we are providing from the centre we believe will continue to help make a difference. But it’s very difficult, with any certainty, to be able to model when those DHBs will hit that 90 percent, because so many things make a difference, including, for instance, the use of mandates or, for instance, the use of vaccine certificates.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: When does she anticipate announcing an end date for her traffic light system?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I’m not sure that it would necessarily be wise, based on what we see with other countries, to put an end date on the use of public health measures. I notice that even, for instance, the UK, who have tended to be one of the more liberal managers of COVID-19, have still maintained the position that, given winter, they may yet move to what they’ve called their “Plan B”, which does bring some public health measures, including the possible use of vaccine certificates, back. So I do think that we would be wise to continue to wait and see what happens over the ongoing trajectory of the pandemic, particularly once countries who are vaccinated, with high rates, move into a winter period.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: So what are the criteria for ending the lockdown in Waikato?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Of course, you’ll see with the low rates there that our ability to extinguish that outbreak continues to exist. What we want to make sure, though, in the meantime is that we don’t see that outbreak prolonged by contact—moving too quickly into levels that would create additional contacts. So there is a view that with our current rates of vaccination, we still have the ability to extinguish and then move into lower alert levels. But, of course, if you want the greatest certainty of all, it would be high vaccination and moving into the new traffic light system.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Why did she wait until month 20 of the pandemic to “set out a plan to accelerate Māori vaccination rates”, as she described it, and wouldn’t it have made more sense to have done that at the start of the vaccine roll-out, rather than near the end?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Well, the first thing I’d point out is the member is counting back to the beginning of a pandemic, when we didn’t even have vaccinations. The second point that I would make is that right from the very beginning, we have specifically funded Māori vaccination initiatives to support the roll-out. The additional funding that we announced on Friday is on top of the $87 million that was put specifically into such campaigns. The second point I would make is that we also, even when we had limited supply and we were working through a process of targeting those most at risk of mortality if they got COVID-19, we still then put specific vaccination doses aside for Māori providers, and we took a whānau-based approach, and we put in a lower age level for Counties Manukau, that we considered to be particularly at risk. So I actually completely reject the suggestion the member has made.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Then why has it been such an unmitigated failure?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I also reject that. That does a complete disservice to the providers, who have been working so hard across New Zealand to ensure that they reach everyone, including in our most rural and isolated communities. What is an indication of what we are able to do across every age group is what has happened with our over-65s and now, increasingly, our over-50s, where the rates there are high and strong. What we need collectively is to drive those same rates amongst our young rangatahi, and one of the issues we know is that they are more likely to be targeted by disinformation, and we all have a role to play on that.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Is she proud of the fact that New Zealand’s vaccination programme has achieved a higher rate of vaccination than Australia, the US, the UK, Germany, Israel, and a whole host of other OECD nations?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Yes. We should all acknowledge the rates that we’ve been able to achieve thus far. But, of course, New Zealand has always said we will base our pandemic response on our situation and on our population and on our values. Those all speak to the fact that we need an equitable roll-out and one that reaches different parts of the country. So if that member wants to take a position on equity, then you don’t pick a date to simply shift your settings; you actually work hard to ensure that you reach as many people as possible.

💬 Hon Judith Collins: Does she believe that 60 out of 67 local councils are wrong to oppose her three waters plan?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: What I believe are the facts, and the facts say that 64 percent of councils do not have water revenues to meet the full cost of running water services and assets. I believe that 34,000 New Zealanders get sick from drinking water every year, and, in the 2019-2020 year, there were over 3,000 overflows from sewerage networks. No one would say that that is OK or right or can continue. We need a plan. It so happens that this Government is willing to progress one, even if members on the other side know nothing about what the opportunities or costs are other than to say they oppose it.

Question No. 2—Finance

2. to the Minister of Finance: Mālō ni, Mr Speaker. What recent reports has he seen on the New Zealand economy?

The export sector continues to support the recovery. Today, Statistics New Zealand reported exports of goods rose 10 percent to $4.4 billion in September compared with the same period a year ago. The main contribution came from dairy products, with gains in prices in sales of milk powder, butter, and cheese. Statistics New Zealand noted that this was a strong start to the export season, with this month having the strongest value for exports for any September month since 2013. The meat sector also contributed strongly, with sales rising 22 percent in a month.

💬 Barbara Edmonds: What other reports has he seen on other parts of the export economy?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Well, the dairy sector continues to support the economy. Yesterday, the dairy cooperative Fonterra increased and narrowed its milk price forecast range for the 2021-22 year to $7.90 to $8.90 per kilo of milk solids from $7.25 to $8.75. The mid-point rose from $8 to $8.40, which I can see the Opposition are welcoming. This would equal the highest milk price paid out in the 2013-2014 season. It shows the dairy sector is holding up well and would see Fonterra contribute around $30 billion to the economy. We thank the dairy sector for their contribution to the economy.

💬 Barbara Edmonds: How are exporters adapting in response to the pandemic?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The 2021 ExportNZ DHL Export Barometer found that Kiwi exporters remain confident and optimistic as New Zealand continues to move through the pandemic. It shows that exporters have adapted to a volatile global environment by looking for opportunities for developing new products and services to increase export sales. Because of this, 51 percent of exporters saw an increase in their sales. The report also shows 62 percent expect international orders to increase, indicating a strong year ahead in 2022. While the survey shows exporters are mostly feeling optimistic, it also shows that they are facing challenges as we work through the global pandemic.

Question No. 3—ACC

3. to the Minister for ACC: Does she have confidence in the Accident Compensation Corporation?

on behalf of the Minister for ACC: Yes.

Brooke van Velden: Is she confident in ACC’s ability to keep New Zealanders’ information safe when it has been reported that ACC staff routinely accessed files that they were told not to?

Approximately 27,000 sensitive claims are actively managed by ACC each year. It is critical that ACC has enough appropriately trained staff with access to the right information available to support claimants. However, it is clear that ACC has work to do to reassure New Zealanders that their private information is safe. ACC has already been looking into staff access to sensitive claims information, and this work is ongoing.

Brooke van Velden: Does she believe it is appropriate that 1,414 ACC staff have access to sensitive claims information in light of the privacy breach reported today, and, if so, why?

I want to reiterate what was in my first answer, which is that we have in this country approximately 27,000 sensitive claims that are actively managed by ACC every year. It is important that we have enough trained people. When we’re dealing with 27,000 sensitive claims that are very complex in nature, it would make sense that we would have up to 1,400 people who would be appropriately trained to look into those claims.

Brooke van Velden: What is her response to an ACC employee who’s put off lodging their own sensitive claim because they do not believe their information would stay private, and who stated, “All of my providers that I’ve been talking to, therapists and things, they say, you know, it’s confidential information. But I work for ACC, so I know it’s not.”?

On behalf of the Minister: I am concerned about the claims that are coming forward and have noted that it is clear that ACC does have work to do to reassure New Zealanders that their private information is safe, and, as Minister, I have made it clear to ACC that privacy and culture are to be a priority. This will be in my next letter of expectations, which I will discuss with the new ACC chair, who is coming in in the next couple of weeks, along with the board chair. [Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member will resume her seat. I think most members think this is a very serious matter—

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Indeed.

💬 SPEAKER: —I’m on my feet, Mr Woodhouse—and I think the House should treat the matter with some respect. Has the Minister finished?

Brooke van Velden: What next steps, aside from simply writing a letter, will she take to ensure the privacy of sensitive claims information held by ACC to give people peace of mind and the dignity they deserve?

ACC is a Crown entity, and I am only able to direct its actions in very limited circumstances. However, I have made it clear to ACC that this is unacceptable, and I expect all ACC staff to respect claimants’ privacy. ACC has already been looking into staff access to sensitive claims information.

Question No. 4—Finance

4. to the Minister of Finance: How many businesses have closed as a result of the 71 days Auckland has been in lockdown, and does he believe that his enhanced business support package announced on 22 October 2021 will avoid further business closures prior to Auckland moving to the new COVID19 Protection Framework?

Information on company closures is not collected in the form that the member requests; however, using the Companies Office’s data on liquidations in the period leading up to 24 October 2021, liquidations have not been materially more than in 2020 or 2019. There were 34 company liquidations last week compared to 28 for the same week the last year, and over the period from 17 August until 24 October, liquidations have been roughly equal to the same period as in 2020. But the loss of businesses and jobs anywhere in the country amid COVID is a cause of concern. That’s why the Government has provided around $4.8 billion in economic support to protect jobs and livelihoods so far, with Auckland receiving an increasing share of that to recognise the extended restrictions that the region has been under.

In response to the second part of the member’s question, the enhanced business support package we announced as part of the move to the new COVID-19 Protection Framework recognises that it has been tough for those in Auckland. While the exact impact of the additional support cannot yet be quantified, it has been roundly welcomed by Auckland businesses and their representatives.

💬 Andrew Bayly: How does he respond to Tourism Export Council of New Zealand chief executive Lynda Keene, who said that the Government’s plan, announced on Friday, is “utterly confusing and underwhelming”?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Obviously, I don’t accept those claims. What we have is a plan that New Zealanders can get behind to get us to a 90 percent vaccination rate in every DHB—a clear set of guidelines for businesses as to how they’ll be able to operate at all three levels of the framework. That kind of clarity and certainty is welcomed, as opposed to the shambles in the Opposition.

💬 Andrew Bayly: Why can’t struggling businesses apply for the increased Resurgence Support Payment as part of the applications that open this Friday, instead of having to wait until 12 November?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: We covered this ground yesterday.

💬 Andrew Bayly: But you didn’t answer it.

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: No, we covered this ground yesterday, for the member. There is an application set to go on 29 October. We then make the system changes that enable the fortnightly payment on 12 November. It is the equivalent of a weekly payment of the Resurgence Support Payment, and I would note, something that has been welcomed by businesses and their representatives in Auckland.

💬 Andrew Bayly: Why didn’t his package allow retail businesses with double vaccinated staff to open immediately to allow double vaccinated customers?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Well, the plan very clearly outlines the way in which retail businesses can reopen at the different levels of the framework. The member will also be aware that as part of the step down that was announced earlier in the month that there is the ability for retail to open at the second part of that step down. We didn’t propose to change that. We’re moving forward on the basis of what has already been outlined.

💬 Andrew Bayly: Wouldn’t the best thing for the country be to allow the 1 million fully vaccinated Aucklanders to get back to work, rather than continue to pay out billions of dollars in support payments until who knows how long?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The best thing for the country is to stick to the plan, and it’s the plan that has served New Zealanders incredibly well over the last 20 months. It’s the plan that’s seen us with unemployment down at 4 percent, with an economy growing better than most other countries in the OECD, with a level of debt lower than most other countries in the OECD, and, at the same time, protecting lives, with one of the lowest mortality rates. We’ve stuck to the plan on this side of the House.

💬 Hon Stuart Nash: Is it true that as part of the business support package that you’re going to make $50 million available to around 10,000 small to medium sized enterprises (SMEs) to have $3,000 worth of business support and around 7,500 SMEs $4,000 to implement that advice?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: That is, indeed, correct. The business advice package to be delivered through the Regional Business Partner Network programme is something that was asked for by businesses in Auckland, and the Government responded to that. I’d also note that alongside that, in part as a result of the advocacy of the member who asked the question, there is $10 million available in terms of mental health support for SMEs, which we know is an important issue. Altogether that is a package that has been welcomed by people across the board, including the Employers and Manufacturers Association and the Auckland Business Chamber of Commerce, who said that the Government had listened. That is what we’re doing on this side of the House.

Question No. 5—Local Government

5. to the Minister of Local Government: What recent announcements has she made regarding Three Waters reform?

I confirmed that two decades of under-investment in three waters infrastructure will be responded to. The Government will create four publicly owned water entities to ensure that every New Zealander has access to affordable water services. This is an all-in approach that will achieve system-wide health and environmental benefits, address ongoing affordability issues for ratepayers, and align to Te Mana o te Wai aspirations. It will require legislation so that all communities benefit. The status quo is simply not viable. We have developed this model over four years, and we need to take action now. We’ve also heard the views of the sector and will establish a joint working group to further refine considerations relating to governance, representation, and accountability arrangements so that we can signal again that we continue to work constructively. I’m pleased this Government is prepared to tackle the long-term, serious challenges that will ensure the underpinning of regional growth and opportunity, certainty of employment, and, furthermore, investing in our waters infrastructure system.

💬 Rachel Boyack: Why is this approach the best way to ensure New Zealanders are guaranteed safe and affordable three waters services?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Without action, New Zealanders are facing significant additional costs to maintain three waters infrastructure. Under the reforms, average household costs per annum by 2051 will be reduced by the following amounts: in Auckland, from $1,910 to be reduced to $800; in Whangārei, it could have been $4,060 without reform, but that will come down to $800; in Timaru, it could have been $5,030 without reform, but with reform such as that that we’re providing, $1,640; and the list goes on. It would be irresponsible to delay further and allow more communities to experience firsthand the consequences of water services that are simply not fit for purpose. No one council has the ability to fix this themselves, and we need to take a collective approach. It would also be irresponsible to pour taxpayers’ money into propping up a broken system, as those people on the other side of the House would have. Currently, 64 percent of councils do not have the revenue to cover their water services’ operating expenditures at the moment, let alone once infrastructure starts failing. Those New Zealanders who have had to deal with boiled water notices, closed beaches, burst pipes, and, tragically, in the case of Havelock North, serious illness and death arising from our three waters infrastructure know all too well why these changes are justified.

💬 Rachel Boyack: What viable alternative proposals did she hear to the model the Government is pursuing?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: A vast amount of analysis and research has been undertaken since the Government began considering the case for three waters reform in mid-2017. All of that information is publicly available and a part of our regulatory impact statement. There are about 30 various models that were tested against the Government’s objectives. No other model would give us the range of benefits that the establishment of four entities does, which includes greater long-term financing arrangements; more sustainable, increased operational efficiencies; the ability to plan, fund, and deliver more resilient and reliable water infrastructure across regions and communities; developing and maintaining workforce capability and capacity. This model also ensures water services stay in public ownership. Assets will remain collectively owned by councils. I’ll say it again: assets will remain collectively owned—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! I think it’s fair to say that the Minister answered the question a minute or two ago.

💬 David Seymour: Can the Minister explain in practical terms how the same pipes and pumping stations and treatment stations in Whangārei can cost $4,000 for the council to operate, per household, but only $800 under her reforms, and can she give the House an example of another public policy reform that has increased productivity five times by simply changing the governance structure?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: That answer is fairly simple with the aggregated model that we are proposing. Economies of scale will be able to deliver far greater benefits, drawing and leveraging on assets across the whole of the entity A area, and that will certainly deliver valuable benefits to ratepayers in Whangārei.

💬 Hon Eugenie Sage: What opportunity is there for real substantive change to the Government’s proposals, when the Government has only spent three weeks considering local government comments, and when the legislation is proposed for introduction within the next seven weeks?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Thank you for that question. This conversation with local government has taken place over four years of work, and during that time we have found that much of the information has been variable. We’ve needed to gather dense information sets from councils to be able to model out, in comparison with international exemplars as well as locally thought up models, what is the best way forward. This isn’t a conversation that’s happened over the last three weeks or eight weeks; it is a four-year conversation. Much of the feedback has already been foreshadowed in the joint working group that we have with local government. And, in fact, the announcement today of establishing a working group to continue to work with local government around the issues of governance, representation, accountability, and local voice only serves to demonstrate and highlight that many of those issues are areas that we can continue to work on.

💬 Rachel Boyack: What feedback has the Minister heard about today’s announcement?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Well, it’s been pleasing to hear that there is still a very diverse view out there. However, let me remind the House that this issue is not simply about local elected representatives; it’s about the communities they serve and the benefits back to ratepayers. But if I go into many of the comments that have been provided, the Water New Zealand chief executive, Gillian Blythe, has said, “It’s been clear for a long time that there is an urgent and serious need to address issues of aging and poorly-performing infrastructure as well as poor service delivery in some parts of the country … The establishment of four professional entities to manage three waters will unlock many of the barriers that have led to serious infrastructure deficit across much of the country.” But if we look across the local government community: Porirua Mayor Anita Baker said, “I am pleased the Government has stepped up and made this decision as we owe residents and ratepayers the truth—and the truth is, without reform, the Council does not have the resources or borrowing capacity to deliver the 3 Waters to an acceptable standard. The cost of doing so is in the billions. Porirua City [Council] has already put aside $800 million over the next 30 years—and that’s not even half of what’s needed.” If I go down to the South, Dr Te Maire Tau, co-chair of Te Kura Taka Pini says, “The government’s reform of three waters will help ensure water services for communities that are safe, high quality, and equitable, while improving outcomes for the environment … It is common ground that the status quo is unsustainable for the health of not only our people, but also our environment and waterways,”.

Question No. 6—Climate Change

6. to the Minister of Climate Change: Has he seen KPMG’s Net Zero Readiness Index 2021; if so, what is his message to New Zealand farmers, who have ranked first in the world for climate change readiness?

I think the Minister can answer the question as it was written.

In answer to the first part of the member’s question, yes. In answer to the second part of the question, I’d like to echo the words of KPMG’s Global Head of Agribusiness, Ian Proudfoot, who said, “This ranking represents New Zealand’s high levels of forest biomass, low levels of food loss and our comparatively high number of agricultural clean tech companies. However, when you are first there is only one way you can move in subsequent surveys, unless we work harder, faster, and more collaboratively. There is still a lot of work to do, and with well-resourced countries only just behind us, there is no room for complacency.”

💬 Mark Cameron: When does he believe the rest of New Zealand—that only ranked ninth in the world for climate change readiness—will catch up with rural New Zealand on climate change?

💬 Hon JAMES SHAW: Well, as I have said many, many times in a number of forums, New Zealand has yet to see a sustained decline in our greenhouse gas emissions right across the economy, and, in fact, once we do start to see that sustained decline, we need to see that every year until we hit net zero. That just underscores the importance of the work that we’ve been doing over the course of the last four years to bend the curve of our emissions downwards over a sustained period of time.

💬 Mark Cameron: Does he agree with the former leader of Greenpeace, who called for aggressive action on agriculture?

💬 Hon JAMES SHAW: I do agree that we do need aggressive action right across the economy. Over the course of the last 30 years, New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions have risen when they should have fallen.

💬 Mark Cameron: Point of order, Mr Speaker. If I may, Mr Speaker, that was quite a salient point about agriculture. I don’t think he addressed it. I think he was more obtuse in his answer.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, I think the question was addressed, even if the member didn’t get the specific answer he wanted.

💬 Mark Cameron: Is he aware that emissions from the agricultural sector—that have remained consistent over the last 20 years—are, in fact, lower than levels seen since 2005, according to data from the Ministry for the Environment, as confirmed by the Parliamentary Library?

💬 Hon JAMES SHAW: I am aware of New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions inventory, yes.

💬 Mark Cameron: Will he be advocating for a split gas approach to better reflect New Zealand’s agricultural industry at COP26?

💬 Hon JAMES SHAW: That’s not on the agenda, no.

Question No. 7—Building and Construction

7. to the Minister for Building and Construction: What recent announcement has she made about providing greater assurance for homeowners?

Yesterday I announced the Government will be introducing a new code of ethics for licenced building practitioners. These are building practitioners who carry out restricted building work, including work that is essential to the structure, weathertightness, and fire safety of residential buildings. We know that the vast majority of licenced building practitioners are already working to the highest professional and ethical standards. However, this code sets out new standards for practitioners to give the industry, consumers, and homeowners clarity on what is expected from those who are licenced. With the building consents at a record high for the sixth month in a row, New Zealanders need building practitioners who are trained, skilled, and accountable.

💬 Greg O’Connor: What other changes is the Government making to improve the quality of building work in New Zealand and to better protect consumers?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: This new code of ethics is part of a wider series of reforms to lift the efficiency and quality of building work in New Zealand. These include a stronger product certification scheme, a new information requirement for building products, and a new certification scheme for modular component manufacturers. These reforms will see a more efficient building system, a lift in the quality of building work, and lead to fairer outcomes if things go wrong.

Question No. 8—COVID-19 Response

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

Yes. In particular, I stand by our action to mandate vaccination of workers in the health and disability, education, and corrections sectors, and for all workers at businesses where customers need to show COVID-19 vaccination certificates. This will help make our workplaces at particular risk from COVID-19 as safe as possible and give confidence to their staff and customers. On this side of the House, we are doing everything we can to support getting vaccination rates up across the country.

💬 Chris Bishop: Has New Zealand ordered specific vials of Pfizer vaccine specifically tailored for 5- to 11-year-olds?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: We are in conversations with Pfizer. As the director-general indicated this morning, a paediatric formulation of the vaccine has only been very recently—i.e., in the last day or so—approved by the Food and Drug Administration in the USA. I think every country will be looking at that, and in our conversations with Pfizer, the agreements that we have with Pfizer do secure us access to a paediatric dose if one should be developed.

💬 Chris Bishop: Has he had any correspondence with Pfizer encouraging them to apply to Medsafe for approval of the vaccine for 5- to 11-year-olds?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I haven’t personally written to Pfizer. On this particular matter, I’m absolutely confident that Pfizer will submit the documentation, the application, to Medsafe in due course, quickly; I think they want to see the paediatric vaccination rolled out as soon as possible as well.

💬 Chris Bishop: Why are fully vaccinated travellers with negative pre-departure tests still spending 14 days in managed isolation and quarantine (MIQ) in Auckland, while 562 people with COVID isolate at home in the community?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The Government will make further announcements on changes to our overall MIQ and border settings tomorrow; we’re working through some further details of that. One of the issues that we have to work through is that our international border operates across the whole country and not just Auckland.

💬 Chris Bishop: Why does the New Zealand vaccination system not recognise vaccinations given overseas, and what is being done as a matter of urgency to sort out this problem, given impending mandates and certificates?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I can provide an absolute assurance that before any requirements for vaccination certificates are put in place, people will be able to have vaccinations that they have received abroad recognised through the vaccination certificate system.

Question No. 9—ACC

9. to the Minister for ACC: Does she have confidence in ACC’s ability to safeguard the privacy of claimants, including those who are survivors of sexual violence, in light of the privacy breach reported today?

on behalf of the Minister for ACC: Yes.

💬 Jan Logie: How can victims have confidence that ACC treats privacy seriously, when it took a whistle-blower going to the media for the agency to identify and then respond to a significant breach of privacy by a dozen staff, including a manager?

On behalf of the Minister, I was appalled when I was informed of this group. I have spoken to the acting chief executive and made it clear that this is unacceptable and I expect all ACC staff to respect claimants’ privacy. I’m advised the staff involved have been suspended. One of the acting chief executive’s senior leadership team is leading an investigation and will be reporting his findings directly to me. ACC has already been looking into staff access to sensitive claims information, but there is clearly more work to be done.

💬 Jan Logie: What explanation has the Minister received for why ACC did not identify and respond to this breach earlier?

As I’ve said in my previous answer, before this issue came to light ACC had already begun looking into staff access to sensitive claims information. ACC’s leadership team are taking this case very seriously. ACC’s acting chief executive contacted me yesterday to advise that ACC had received an email containing screenshots that appeared to show a group of current and former staff sharing claim information on social media. At that point, I made it clear that this is unacceptable and I expect all ACC staff to respect claimants’ privacy. He has moved quickly and decisively to suspend the staff involved. As I’ve said, one of his executive team is leading an investigation and will be reporting the findings directly to me. As this is now an employment matter under active investigation, it would not be appropriate for me to speak to any further details.

💬 Jan Logie: Point of order, Mr Speaker. That was useful information but didn’t seem to me to address the key point of why they didn’t pick it up themselves and it required the whistle-blower.

💬 SPEAKER: I’ll ask the member to ask her question again.

💬 Jan Logie: What explanation has the Minister received for why ACC did not identify and respond to this breach earlier?

As I pointed out, this is under active investigation at this point in time. That information will be directed completely back to the Minister at that point in time, in which time the Minister will be able to give a more fulsome answer.

💬 Jan Logie: Can the Minister assure this House there have been no other instances of private information being shared in social media groups by ACC staff over the last five years?

On behalf of the Minister, I have not been made aware of any historic cases where private information has been shared on social media, and I have made it clear that I expect that all staff respect claimants’ privacy and are aware of their obligations under the Privacy Act and Health Information Privacy Code.

💬 Jan Logie: Is it true that one of ACC’s strategic priorities is privacy and this has been a priority for many years?

It is my expectation, as it is of all New Zealanders, that all New Zealanders should expect that their documents and their privacy are respected by ACC at the utmost level.

💬 Jan Logie: How can we have confidence in ACC doing an internal review of privacy when it supposedly has been a strategic priority for many years, they’ve been in trouble for privacy breaches before, and they are not picking up absolutely flagrant breaches of their own policy?

On behalf of the Minister, I am very concerned about this breach that has been reported in the media today and over previous weeks. In two weeks’ time, ACC’s new chief executive will begin her new role. I have made it clear to ACC that privacy and culture are to be a priority and this will be in my next letter of expectation, which I will discuss with her and the new board chair in coming weeks. If it is found that there is a systemic issue at ACC, I expect them to use whatever means necessary to fix it.

Question No. 10—Education (School Operations)

10. to the Associate Minister of Education (School Operations): What work is she progressing for students with the highest learning support needs?

Last week I announced a review into students who are considered the highest need for learning support intervention. This review was one of the deliverables under priority area 4 of the Government’s Learning Support Action Plan 2019-2025. We know that some students aren’t getting the right support they need and when they need it. As a result it’s expected that 50,000 to 80,000 students are expected to benefit from the outcomes of this review. The Government is committed to barrier-free access to education for all students. This review will ensure all Kiwi kids are receiving the education they deserve.

💬 Angela Roberts: Why is this review needed?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: The learning support systems we have in place now were established over 20 years ago by the previous Labour Government, led by the Rt Hon Helen Clark, and haven’t been reviewed since then. This review has been widely called, from the education sector to parents and those in the disability sector. Fundamentally, this review is about addressing inequity in the education system for young people that have challenges with learning. At the moment, some learners are being excluded because their learning needs aren’t being met. As a Government, we have set our goal in education to build an inclusive education system, and that must include our most vulnerable learners.

💬 Angela Roberts: What are the next steps for this work?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: The terms of reference approved by Cabinet underwent extensive consultation with over 80 stakeholder groups to help us understand the nature of the issues relating to individualised learning supports and services. Most stakeholders indicated that the system needs to shift from the current deficit-based approach of accessing and receiving supports to a strength-based, mana-enhancing one. That is our goal. The Ministry of Education will now undergo further and wider consultation on the substance of the review over the next 12 months. Recommendations are due to the Government in 2022. I encourage all of those who wish to have a voice in the future of learning support services to actively engage in this work. More detail can be found on the Ministry of Education’s website.

Question No. 11—Local Government

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

Yes, particularly my statement that there has been 10 years of under-investment in three waters infrastructure, and the case for change for our three waters infrastructure is too compelling to ignore. Without the new entities, we will continue to see a frail network and contaminated water. To delay will only push the problem on, increase future household costs, and put livelihoods at risk.

💬 Nicola Willis: Will councils be issued shares in the new water entities, and, if not, how is this not simply State-sponsored theft?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Mr Speaker.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, I’ll allow the—I mean, it is out of order, but I’ll—

💬 Hon Members: Why?

💬 SPEAKER: Of course it’s out of order. The idea that a bill passed by Parliament is State-sponsored theft is just ridiculous. The member can answer the first part of the question.

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: To the first part of the question—

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Point of order. Mr Speaker, given the comment that you just made, I think it would be appropriate if you could point to the appropriate Standing Order that makes the second part of that question out of order.

💬 SPEAKER: The member could start with irony.

💬 David Seymour: Speaking to the point of order. Mr Speaker, it’s a widely held view in New Zealand that half the bills passed by Parliament are State-sponsored theft.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, it might be the widely held view in the circle that the member moves in and it might be an increasing circle at the current time, but it’s not generally the case.

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: To the first part of the—

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Point of order.

💬 SPEAKER: I hope the member’s not going to dispute my ruling.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Yes, Mr Speaker. Well, I want to just point out—

💬 SPEAKER: Well, I just want to say to the members behind Mr Woodhouse, he’s at risk and they’re at risk too if they continue their noise.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Point of order. Mr Speaker, the definition of “irony”, according to my recollection, is a statement that usually means one thing intended to mean another. The question was very direct and had no double meaning.

💬 SPEAKER: All right—OK. Well, the member’s used his last chance.

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: To the first part of the question, in order to ensure a public ownership model of water service entities and to safeguard against privatisation, the design of these entities will not be of a shareholding nature or distribute dividends to councils. But let me be very clear: councils currently own water assets. Those assets will transfer and be collectively owned by councils under their respective entity.

💬 Nicola Willis: How will local communities keep control of their water assets when her Government is confiscating those assets and handing over control to a complex smorgasbord of unelected appointees and officials?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: That member wants to perpetuate a myth of her own making. In fact, what the new water service entities will do is enable the ability to invest in waters infrastructure in a way that councils cannot currently do. What that will deliver is greater benefits to households, who will have the assurance that with reform, they will get not only a quality service but also the benefit of small and big regions alike being treated in a way where absolutely they will have safe drinking water. There will be improved environmental outcomes and there will be an assurance that alongside regional growth and opportunity, certainty of employment of those currently in the water industry and going forward under these reforms are guaranteed.

💬 Hon Dr Megan Woods: Is it true that lack of investment in three waters infrastructure has been holding back housing developments, and does the Minister expect today’s announcement will improve the development of new housing across New Zealand?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Yes, and sadly the previous Government did nothing about this, so the legacy of under-investment was left as a too hard issue that was not addressed. And the total sum of that, as we know, is that three waters infrastructure now is in dire need of investment in order to enable housing—a priority of this Government. These reforms will certainly support that ambition, and ensure that we can continue to invest in housing so that our regions can grow and there will be further opportunities for our communities.

💬 Nicola Willis: How much of the proposed entity A would Auckland Council own and therefore Auckland ratepayers have control over?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: As I announced today, the whole purpose of announcing the three waters working group is to further refine the governance, representation, and accountability arrangements which provide for local voice to be worked on. The simple answer is that there will be no shareholding or dividend opportunity under any of these entities, because we are giving an absolute assurance to ratepayers that this is a public model and that we are safeguarding against privatisation.

💬 Nicola Willis: Why has she ignored most of New Zealand’s mayors and all those New Zealanders who have asked for three waters plans to be put on hold, and what is the point of a working group, when she intends to force these changes on councils regardless?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: We are not like the Opposition that when there are really hard issues and long-term challenges that need to be addressed, you kick the can down the road; you run away, close your eyes, and say, “Well, we won’t do anything.” The simple thing is to do nothing. The more difficult thing, which this Government is prepared to do, is address the long-term systemic challenges of under-investment in waters infrastructure. That’s why we’re acting.

Question No. 12—Workplace Relations and Safety

12. to the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety: What recent announcements has the Government made regarding vaccination requirements for workforces?

on behalf of the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety: The Government announced yesterday a range of measures to help protect workplaces and workers from COVID-19. We’ve heard the calls from employers and employees to provide certainty on what roles need to be done by vaccinated workers under the COVID-19 Protection Framework. We’ve provided that certainty and we’re mandating vaccination for workers at businesses where customers need to show COVID-19 vaccine certificates. We know that these changes raise questions around what happens when mandated employees refuse to get vaccinated. And so, to provide clarity, a new four-week notice period will apply if people are terminated if they choose not to be vaccinated and their work requires vaccination.

💬 Ibrahim Omer: Why are these requirements necessary?

Both customers and staff will want to have confidence that they are as safe as possible when going into situations where the risk of the virus spreading is high, such as gyms and bars. A number of businesses have already gone through a risk assessment process to mandate vaccinations in their workplace, but we’ve had calls from both businesses and unions to make this process as clear as possible. That’s why we’ll introduce a risk assessment process in law for employers to follow when deciding whether they can require vaccination for different types of work. This process will provide businesses with a clear and simplified legal framework to make decisions about requiring staff to be vaccinated or not.

💬 Ibrahim Omer: What engagement and feedback has he had on the new proposals?

We’ve been working closely with the Council of Trade Unions (CTU) and BusinessNZ, and we’ve had largely encouraging feedback since the announcement. BusinessNZ have said the feedback from business to the announcement has been overwhelmingly positive. The CTU supports the policy, and Richard Wagstaff, the president, is encouraging businesses to start talking to their people about it now. The Employers & Manufacturers Association was very supportive of the Government “listening to Business New Zealand and the CTU”, and the employment relations and safety manager there said, “It’s great to see them working together.” Retail NZ has also welcomed the greater certainty around vaccinations that has been signalled by the Government.