Oral Questions

1. to the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety: Will the Government further progress Fair Pay Agreements; if so, why, given it was not the preferred option of his own officials?

Yes. Some of the workers who have gotten New Zealand through COVID-19, like our cleaners, our checkout operators, and our bus drivers, are some of the heroes of our country’s response over the last two years, and fair pay agreements are about making sure that they get a fairer deal. For 30 years, some of these workers have been left out in the cold in our labour market, and we clearly and transparently campaigned on fair pay agreements to change this. Investing in our people is a key part of our COVID-19 economic recovery plan, and these agreements will help to prevent a race to the bottom in some of these sectors. They’ll deliver better employment terms and conditions for workers and help to boost productivity for Kiwi businesses by encouraging competition that is based not on low wages but on better products and services.

💬 Chris Baillie: Does he share the concerns of Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) officials that the proposed system may “Create significant labour market inflexibility and cost when it is used in sectors without a demonstrable labour market issue.”, and does he think this could have a negative impact on employees?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: No, I don’t agree with that advice. And I do note that in this country, in the democracy that we live in, Governments listen to the advice of officials, but Governments should follow through on the commitments that they make when they campaign upon them. What the member and the advice also misunderstands and misconstrues is that we do currently have weaknesses in our existing labour market, and I think it’s all very well for members of the House on salaries of around about $180,000 to think that we have a well-functioning labour market; it’s a little bit different—[Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! Order! Now, I know it’s getting close to Christmas and members are getting excited—[Members laughing] Order!—but the level of noise is too much. Members from that quarter of the House, one of their members has asked a question; if they want him to have further supplementaries, they will let the Minister answer without trying to drown him out.

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: As I was saying, I think it’s all very well for a member of this House on a salary of around about $180,000 to feel that New Zealand’s labour market meets all of their needs. It’s a little bit different for someone who might be a cleaner earning $40,000 a year on the minimum wage, raising a family in one of our major cities, with significant job insecurity. On this side of the House, we do believe in backing Kiwi workers. We do believe that it is time to end the 1980s, 1990s deregulated labour model that has led to significant inequality in our country, and that is one of the differences between this side of the House and that one.

💬 Chris Baillie: Is he concerned at MBIE’s advice that there is a risk that fair pay agreements may conflict with the United Nations’ International Labour Organisation’s (ILO) rights to freedom of association and voluntary collective bargaining, and what impact does this have on employees?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: I don’t expect there to be any impact on employees, and if the member opposite is arguing for strict compliance with all of those ILO conventions, then I look forward to a speech from him in this House in favour of an unrestricted right to strike.

💬 Jan Logie: How will fair pay agreements benefit women, Māori, and Pasifika who are experiencing significant and enduring underpayment in work?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: It is very clear that we have significant inequalities in parts of our labour market, and I’ll come back to the comments that I made earlier. Much of the work that is utterly essential in our economy and our society has been devalued for 30 years, during which time we have not had sector-based bargaining, as most other developed countries do have. We know that much of that work—and think about those cleaners who come into these halls and these offices every single night to look after members of this Chamber, those workers who live and have to exist and subsist and support their families on very low wages. We know that across those workforces, we have a preponderance of women, Māori, and Pasifika, and those are inequalities that fair pay agreements will also support us in addressing.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: How has he managed a process that has resulted in the chief executive of BusinessNZ writing to him saying, “We simply cannot in good faith take taxpayers’ money to help facilitate a workplace relations scheme that is unlawful, unfair, and out of touch with modern ways of working.”

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: While I disagree with the tenor of those comments, I would note that we continue to enjoy a very productive and constructive relationship with Mr Hope and BusinessNZ. In fact, I had a very cordial meeting with him this morning about a range of issues. But what I do respond to, to both that member and to Mr Hope, is the contention that the current workplace relations settings that we have are necessarily modern. What that member is defending is an ideology in workplace relations settings that comes from the days of the 1980s and 1990s. On this side of the House, we actually believe in a more collaborative approach, and we believe in giving Kiwi workers a fair go in areas where they are not getting that at the moment.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Why doesn’t he trust businesses and individuals to sort out pay and conditions for themselves?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: Well, I note that the member’s question is very consistent with positions on that side of the House, for example, against the minimum wage, which is one of those areas in which we say that, actually, there should be a decent baseline in terms of the terms and conditions that we have. If we took that position to its logical extent, we wouldn’t have statutory sick leave and we wouldn’t have statutory annual leave and we wouldn’t have statutory health and safety protections. I know that that might be the extremist market ideological approach of that member, but that is not the view that members on this side of the House have.

💬 Chris Baillie: How did he respond to the risks identified by his officials that fair pay agreements could create “non-wage costs from reduced flexibility, potentially impacting innovation, productivity and competition.”, and does he think any of these costs flow to employees?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: The international evidence here is actually quite to the contrary. As I said, New Zealand is an outlier in terms of not having any kind of sector-based bargaining, as opposed to, for example, the most productive exporting economy in the developed world, Germany, and as opposed to our nearest neighbour, Australia, who has had sector-based bargaining in place for most of the past 40 years, and has higher rates of labour productivity than New Zealand, under the mainly individualised system of wage bargaining that we have.

Question No. 2—Housing

2. to the Minister of Housing: Does she stand by the then Minister of Housing’s statement in December 2017 that “home ownership will become more affordable for New Zealand families”, and why hasn’t the Government delivered on this commitment?

on behalf of the Minister of Housing: I do stand by the then Minister’s statement, in the context it was given. When we came to Government in 2017, we inherited a housing crisis caused by decades of inaction, and, in particular, a failure of the previous Government to acknowledge the crisis and build enough houses. So while the previous Government refused to even admit there was a crisis, we took action. We banned offshore speculators. We closed tax loops for investors. We began the largest build programme in a generation, established the progressive homeownership scheme, and we’re supporting thousands of Kiwis into their first homes through first-home grants. While we have reset the KiwiBuild programme, the lives of more than 1,000 families have been changed by purchasing their first home through this programme. We know there’s more work to do and we’re starting to see the green shoots, with a record number of houses being built and the highest market share for some homebuyers on record. I’m proud of our record to date, and I would put this against the previous Government’s denial and inaction any day of the week.

💬 Nicola Willis: What does the Minister say to all the New Zealanders who feel betrayed by a Government that promised 100,000 affordable KiwiBuild homes but has instead delivered rampant house price inflation, with house prices leaping up, on average—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member finished her question some time ago.

On behalf of the Minister, what I would say is I would balance our record in Government against the National Party’s with, under Nick Smith, the delivery of 100 affordable homes under the special housing areas. Already, we have delivered a thousand homes under KiwiBuild.

💬 SPEAKER: Look, as I indicated to the House yesterday, I am receiving a very high level of complaints about the public not being able to hear members when they’re speaking. One particular set of complaints related to this member yesterday and what was perceived by the public to be the shouting down of her during the general debate. I’m not prepared to put up with a House in a position whereby Ministers answering questions are not being heard.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Point of order. Mr Speaker, you seem to want us to be in silence all the time.

💬 SPEAKER: In this particular case, I do. The member will resume his seat.

💬 Nicola Willis: When will the Minister admit that her Government’s housing policies of changing tax rules, promising KiwiBuild houses, and hiring hundreds of highly paid housing advisers has utterly failed to deliver affordable housing for New Zealand families?

On behalf of the Minister, we are in the middle of a residential housing building boom, as evidenced by 45,000 consents, up by 20 percent in the last year alone. Not only that, but this Government is supporting that build by ensuring that there’s sufficient infrastructure, we’re building the workforce capacity through our apprenticeship schemes, we’ve made changes to tax schemes, we’re tilting away from speculation to investment, and first-home buyers in the homebuyers’ market are increased to 25 percent of the market, signalling very clearly that we are doing much more in this space and building far more homes than that Government ever did.

💬 Nicola Willis: Is the Minister concerned that her Government is at risk of delivering the lowest ever number of First Home Grants this year despite her promise in March to adjust the settings and give more first-home buyers access to the scheme?

On behalf of the Minister, I actually reject the premise of that member’s question. The number of first-home buyers continues to grow both in number and proportion of all buyers, just as I’ve said. The most important thing that we can do to help first-home buyers is to increase the overall supply of new housing, and we have a comprehensive plan to do that and we are delivering on that.

💬 Nicola Willis: Point of order, Mr Speaker. The question was specifically about First Home Grants, which was not addressed in the Minister’s reply.

💬 SPEAKER: Yeah, absolutely right; it was, and it wasn’t. The member knows if she asks a general primary question, she cannot expect an answer to a specific supplementary.

💬 Nicola Willis: Will the Minister just admit that the Government’s policies have made homeownership less affordable than ever, with 19,000 more families waiting for a State house, 4,000 families raising their children in emergency motel rooms, and rents up $90 a week?

On behalf of the Minister, I’d just like to note that the Reserve Bank supports this Government in terms of its strong growth of supply, and with our current low population growth environment, it means that supply is now exceeding growth in demand. This will improve affordability for first-home buyers.

💬 Hon David Parker: Further to that answer, can the Minister confirm that since 2017, the number of houses being built in Auckland per annum has increased 90 percent, from 10,000 a year to 19,000 this year?

On behalf of the Minister, yes, I can confirm that.

💬 Nicola Willis: Does the Minister think the Government’s decision to spend $800 million buying houses on the open market in direct competition with first-home buyers has helped make homeownership more affordable for New Zealand families?

On behalf of the Minister, between 1 November 2017 and 31 October 2021, we have increased public homes by 8,683—6,824 of those were new builds. But what we have done is we have taken the total public homes to 74,917.

💬 Nicola Willis: How many KiwiBuild houses has the Government built this year, and does the Minister think that’s a number to be proud of?

On behalf of the Minister, I would like to compare our KiwiBuild programme, which has taken a thousand Kiwi families and put them in a home, to the special housing areas of that Government, which delivered 100 affordable homes in nine years.

💬 Nicola Willis: Why does the Minister keep blaming National for New Zealand’s housing emergency when she promised to fix it, she failed, and this week National is helping her out with a bill that will do more to reduce the housing shortage than anything that Minister has done for four years?

On behalf of the Minister, when building consents had fallen off the cliff, National did nothing to bring confidence to the market: no underwriting of developments; nothing to encourage new builds and affordable housing; nothing to keep the skilled workforce from leaving New Zealand; nothing to grow the workforce, the builders and tradies; and hardly anything spent on infrastructure. We, on the other hand, we’ve cracked down on investors, we’re encouraging new affordable housing, the house building sector is booming, we’ve had months of record-breaking new dwelling consents, we have thousands of new apprentices in the building sector, we’re rebuilding public housing, and we, the State, have stepped in where the market has failed to develop land and invest in infrastructure for housing.

Question No. 3—Education

Question number—[Interruption] Look, I’m on my feet. Who interjected? Out. Question No. 3—Ibrahim Omer.

Hon Paul Goldsmith withdrew from the Chamber.

Thank you, Mr Speaker—

💬 Chris Bishop: Point of order. Mr Speaker, I’m just reflecting on the proportionality of the punishment to the crime here.

💬 SPEAKER: The member will resume his seat. I have made a ruling. I have—

💬 Chris Bishop: I know that.

💬 SPEAKER: The member doesn’t even know what he’s muttering when I’m on my feet, yet again, as he didn’t yesterday. I mean, the member should know when he is talking, because otherwise there’s a disconnect there somewhere. I have ruled. Ibrahim Omer.

💬 IBRAHIM OMER: Thank you, Mr Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Education and asks: What new action is the Government taking to support schools to provide learning environments for their students that are “warm, dry”—[Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Right. Which member was that? Who interjected then?

Tim van de Molen: Me—it was me.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, the member will join his colleague.

Tim van de Molen withdrew from the Chamber.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Point of order. It’s a fresh point. One thing that concerned me was at the end of that question 4, and I didn’t raise a point of order because I thought it was going to be what Chris Bishop would raise, we had all of this section [Gestures towards the Government benches] clapping like performing seals and I found it very disruptive. The point simply is that that did seem to me disorderly and I wondered why you didn’t rule on it.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, I think—well, once again, the member’s been here for some time—

💬 Hon Todd McClay: Like seals.

💬 SPEAKER: Oh, Todd McClay. I just don’t believe it.

💬 Hon Member: Let’s go.

💬 Hon Members: We’ll all just go.

💬 SPEAKER: No. Order!

💬 Hon Todd McClay: The best punishment would be to make me stay.

💬 SPEAKER: No, no, I understand that. You get the same punishment as Mr Bridges used to get on Thursday afternoon: you have to stay. Just a couple of points. First of all, we haven’t got to question 4 yet. The second point I’d make is the member knows that if he has a point of order, he should take it at the time or even straight after the member. If he had a different point of order, he could have taken it. He chose not to. We went on to a question and then he interrupted it. It’s just—oh, I don’t know. I mean—

💬 Hon Members: Ha, ha!

💬 SPEAKER: It’s fair to say that we should probably move on, because I’m speechless, because I know the member is better than that. Ibrahim Omer.

3. to the Minister of Education: What new action is the Government taking to support schools to provide learning environments for their students that are “warm, dry and fit for purpose”?

Today, I announced a further 23 schools that are set to benefit from the Government’s investment in short-term roll-growth classrooms right the way across New Zealand. Schools around New Zealand are growing, and as our students and young people return to face-to-face learning, we want them to have warm, dry, fit for purpose classrooms to learn in. This investment ensures that almost 1,500 more students will have a place to do that. It’s part of the Government’s $100 million commitment from Budget 2021 and the Government’s plan to provide 100,000 additional student spaces by 2030.

💬 Dr Deborah Russell: How are schools and students in Auckland benefiting from this initiative?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: More good news. We’re investing $25 million across 17 schools in Auckland to give them additional learning spaces to help them cope with growing student numbers. That includes five classrooms for Green Bay High and two classrooms for Glenavon School in the member’s electorate, along with six classrooms for Henderson High School and four classrooms each for Henderson Intermediate, Kaipara College, and Waitakere College.

💬 Ingrid Leary: How are schools and students in other parts of the country benefiting from this initiative?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Oh, considerably. We’re investing over $4.5 million in Otago, Southland schools. Taieri College, in the member’s own electorate, will get four classrooms. Oamaru Intermediate will get two classrooms. Te Wharekura o Arowhenua will get two classrooms. We’re also investing over $6 million in three schools in the Bay of Plenty, and Te Awamutu College will get three classrooms. Pāpāmoa College will be getting four classrooms, and Merivale School in Tauranga will be getting two additional classrooms.

💬 Ibrahim Omer: What progress has been made towards the Government’s plan to provide 100,000 additional student places by 2030?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: We have already delivered a fifth of those: 20,000 additional student spaces already delivered; 9,300 are currently in construction; and we’ve got 41,000 more in the planning and design stage.

Question No. 4—Finance

4. to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by all of his statements and actions on inflation?

Yes, in the context in which they were made and undertaken.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Is he concerned that with inflation at 4.9 percent currently and wage growth at 2.4 percent, Kiwis’ real wages are going backwards, making it tougher for them this Christmas?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I’m always concerned to make sure that we see New Zealand’s wages increase, and I look forward to the member’s support for our minimum wage increase.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Does he accept that, on average, Kiwis will have less money in their back pockets going into Christmas, not more, as he promised in his Budget speech earlier this year?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As we’ve covered already in question time this week, those comments were made on the basis of the Treasury’s forecast at the time. What I do know is that New Zealanders are going into Christmas with unemployment at 3.4 percent—historically low—and with job growth happening even in the midst of the restrictions that we’ve had.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Does he take some responsibility for the very high inflation in New Zealand currently, given, as but one example, the view of ANZ economists just yesterday that more Government spending now “may achieve little else than higher inflation and interest rates than otherwise”?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Those same ANZ economists talked about the importance of balance in what we did and talked about the importance of making sure that we continue to provide targeted support. This Government stands by our economic record that has seen New Zealand come through a pandemic in much better shape than many other countries.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Does he take some responsibility for the ongoing interest rate rises we’re seeing, given that the 40 percent increase in Government spending since 2017 is having an inflationary effect, which, in turn, moves interest rates higher?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The increase in Government expenditure that we’ve seen since 2017 was a direct response to the under-investment of the Government that that member was part of. If you don’t invest in health, if you don’t invest in education, and if you don’t invest in building houses, someone has to make up for it.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Can he name one policy of this Government that will help reduce inflationary pressures?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Well, one of the things will be building some houses, which that previous Government failed completely to do.

Question No. 5—Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations

5. to the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations: What progress has been made on historical Treaty of Waitangi settlements in 2021?

While the remaining historical settlements are some of the most complex that we’ve had to contend with, I’m pleased to report good progress has been made this year in acknowledging the Crown’s historical breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi. This year, deeds of settlement have been signed with Ngāti Paoa, Ngāti Kahungunu ki Wairarapa Tāmaki nui-ā-Rua, Te Ākitai Waiōhua, Ngāti Maru, and Maniapoto. We progressed legislation in this House for settlements with Moriori, Ahuriri, Ngāti Rangitihi, and Ngāti Hinerangi. I want to acknowledge the many iwi and hapū and their representatives, who, along with the Crown, have had to accept many adaptations to the way they engage because of COVID-19, including changing kanohi-ki-te-kanohi engagements to digital “Zui”, but have none the less continued this important work while supporting their communities. I’d also like to mihi to the Māori Affairs Committee for their mahi in this area.

💬 Shanan Halbert: What mechanisms have been put in place to support negotiations with Ngā hapū o Ngāpuhi?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: At Waitangi this year, I announced Tupu Tonu, their $150 million Ngāpuhi investment fund. Tupu Tonu was set up to acquire land and assets in the rohe that can be offered by the Crown in negotiations with Ngāpuhi. Tupu Tonu has worked to build relationships in Te Tai Tokerau, developing this kaupapa and its investment strategy throughout the year. Tupu Tonu is only one of a number of measures the Government is taking to restore the relationship between the Crown and Ngā hapū o Ngāpuhi.

💬 Shanan Halbert: What progress has been made in land banking for future Treaty of Waitangi settlements?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: The Treaty settlements land bank allows for the Crown to purchase land which is surplus to requirements by Government departments. The purchased land can be used for cultural or commercial redress in future settlements. A feature of the land banking mechanism is that claimant groups can identify culturally significant sites for the Crown to consider purchasing. It’s particularly important in areas where there’s little Crown-owned land remaining. This year, the Government agreed to purchase a property in Taipā Bay for the land bank, and I was happy to meet with local members of hapū up there to discuss that last week. But a number of other proposals to add to the land bank are currently being considered.

Question No. 6—House (Public Housing)

6. to the Associate Minister of Housing (Public Housing): Does she stand by her statement that the Government is “monitoring what happens with rent rises and will take action if necessary”; if so, does she think action is necessary now?

Kia orana, Mr Speaker. Yes, the Government has taken action by making a number of changes to support renters by limiting rent increases to once a year, banning rental bidding, banning letting fees, removing no-cause terminations, and increasing the rates for the Accommodation Supplement for the first time since 2005. I would encourage those who have experienced a rent increase to get in touch with the Ministry of Social Development and access the support available, and if they think their rent is too high to seek a rent reduction through the Tenancy Tribunal. We will continue to keep a close eye on rent prices and will take further action if necessary.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: How does she respond to this month’s ANZ Insight report regarding inflation, and in particular their statement that “for a poor household whose budget can barely cover the essentials even when inflation is low, the choice quickly becomes: do I have lunch this week or pay the rent?”

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: I have sympathy for people who are finding themselves in difficulty. There are a range of opportunities for people to take. If they feel their rents, for example, are too high—to access support through the Tenancy Tribunal and, as I stated in the answer to the primary question, there are also opportunities to seek assistance through the Ministry of Social Development.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: Is she concerned that according to Stats New Zealand’s household income and housing costs-statistics: year ended June 2020, one in four tenants in New Zealand spend 40 percent or more of their income on rent?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: That does concern this Government which is why we have, as I have already stated, put measures in place to support tenants but also we have done far more in supporting families around their costs.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: Does she think it’s fair for the onus to be on tenants to dispute annual rent increases through the Tenancy Tribunal, and why does this responsibility not lie with landlords to justify why rent is increasing?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: Because that is the mechanism that is in place. We know that there have been cases taken to the Tenancy Tribunal that have been successful in that regard, and I would also suggest that tenants get the support and advice from Tenancy Services.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: Does she think it is fair that rents in New Zealand have increased by 8 percent in the last year; and, if not, does she think that rental prices should come down?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: There are a number of measures for rent prices. We use Stats New Zealand rental price index, which provides the most accurate and complete view of rent prices and changes. What I do want to say is that COVID has had an impact on the current spike that we are experiencing in rental prices because there were restrictions upon people being able to access, view, and get into new tenancies during the current lockdown. We’re keeping an eye on that, we’re monitoring the situation, and we will act if needed.

Question No. 7—Economic and Regional Development

7. to the Minister for Economic and Regional Development: What decision has the Government recently made about New Zealand securing the Sail Grand Prix competition?

In tandem with the international Sail GP organisers, yesterday we announced that New Zealand has secured a leg of the competition for the next four seasons. Lyttelton Harbour will be one of 10 international stopovers for season 3 of the competition, which runs across 2022 and 2023, and Auckland and Christchurch will host alternative seasons after that. The Government has secured hosting rights through a partnership with the Economic Development Agencies ChristchurchNZ and Auckland Unlimited. I have approved funding of up to $5.4 million over four years from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment’s major events fund, and the agencies will co-fund it as well. Sail GP is one of the most exciting sailing races in the international calendar, and the races on Lyttelton Harbour and the Hauraki Gulf will allow spectators to enjoy high-speed action up close.

💬 Helen White: What benefits and opportunities are expected from the Crown investment in Sail GP?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: As well as its importance to the yachting-mad communities of Auckland, I’m particularly pleased we have secured the event for Christchurch. Hosting the event provides new opportunities for Christchurch to promote itself to domestic and international audiences as a destination for visitors and a place to do business from. Sail GP also has the particular focus on the environment and on diversity. It places strong emphasis on reducing carbon emissions and protecting marine ecosystems like those in the Hauraki Gulf, as well as an emphasis on diversity through their pathway for women to be on their teams. These objectives align perfectly with Government priorities.

💬 Helen White: What reports has he seen regarding the importance of New Zealand securing this event?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: Sail GP is a comparatively new event but has strong Kiwi connections. New Zealand’s team is headed by Olympic and America’s Cup champions Peter Burling and Blair Tuke. America’s Cup legend Sir Russell Coutts is also involved in the global competition. Peter Burling said yesterday—and I quote—“There’s been a huge amount of hard work that’s gone on behind the scenes to bring Sail GP to Aotearoa, and so we’re incredibly excited to race on home waters. We’ve always had fantastic support from Kiwi fans.” Blair Tuke has said—and I quote—“These events at home in Aotearoa will be a fantastic opportunity to share the message of ocean restoration and protection through the event’s charity partner, Live Ocean, which uses mātauranga Māori principles to enhance scientific knowledge and improve the health of our oceans.”

💬 Chris Bishop: Point of order. That was actually a very specific supplementary question, which related to what reports the Minister had received, and I did not hear in that answer—I heard a lot of information about various people, but no reference to reports the Minister had received.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, can I just say the member is suggesting that the Minister got quotes but didn’t get them from anywhere. I just don’t understand what he’s saying.

💬 Chris Bishop: Well, where were the reports? The Minister’s answer has to address—

💬 SPEAKER: For goodness’ sake. For a supplementary question, the Minister doesn’t have to indicate the source of every quote that he makes. The member knows that. He’s been around here for a long time. He probably drafted a lot of those patsy supplementaries!

Question No. 8—COVID-19 Response

8. to the Minister for COVID-19 Response: What regions were listed in the preliminary view submitted to the Director-General of Health as being able to enter the COVID-19 Protection Framework at green, and was this preliminary view ever shared with his office?

The preliminary view of the Ministry of Health’s COVID-19 Protection Framework assessment committee considered whether the South Island, the Wellington region district health boards (DHBs), and the Hawke’s Bay and MidCentral DHBs could enter the COVID-19 Protection Framework at green. However, the assessment committee had specific concerns about the number of areas with lower vaccination status, particularly for Māori and also active cases in several DHBs outside of Auckland, so it advised the director-general that all regions should enter at orange except for Auckland and Northland. In answer to the second part of the question, the advice was provided to the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (DPMC) for incorporation into the final Cabinet paper for consideration by Ministers. I’m advised that it was copied to my office as part of that process.

💬 Chris Bishop: In relation to what he just said about the information being copied to his office, was he made aware by his office of that preliminary view?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: My understanding is that the advice was provided to the director-general on the 24th, by the public health officials. It was provided to DPMC and copied to my office on the 25th, which was a Thursday. The first that I can recall having seen that advice was when I received the draft Cabinet paper over that weekend to review and approve for lodging to Cabinet. I do not recall having seen the specific memo that the Ministry of Health provided to DPMC.

💬 Chris Bishop: Was the preliminary view that was submitted to the Director-General of Health included in the draft Cabinet paper that he’s just referenced, and did it make it to the final version of the Cabinet paper he submitted to Cabinet on the 29th?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Reference to the memorandum concerned was in the Cabinet paper, including, essentially, the content that I mentioned in my primary answer.

💬 Chris Bishop: Did public health officials arrive at the final recommendation that no region should enter at green without any consultation with him or his office?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I, during the period of time in question, was in regular contact with the Director-General of Health, as I regularly am, including that he would’ve kept me informed of the advice that he was receiving, as I indicated in the House yesterday.

Question No. 9—Transport

9. to the Minister of Transport: What reports has he seen on coastal shipping?

Of interest to the House—and particularly, especially, to the shadow Leader of the House—I have seen an excellent report recently on coastal shipping. It’s called the Coastal Shipping Investment Approach Report 1 – State-of-Play, and it’s an important step towards a more sustainable coastal shipping sector. This Government is committed to strengthening our domestic supply chain by making the blue highway a more viable alternative for moving freight within New Zealand. We are still experiencing the serious consequence of COVID-19 on global supply chains, with unprecedented delays to freight. So it’s essential that we increase our resilience against future disruptions of this scale, and coastal shipping has an important role to play.

💬 Naisi Chen: What are the recommendations of the report?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: The insights provided in this initial report by independent consultants from Pacific Marine Management, commissioned by Waka Kotahi, will help to decide how best to invest the $30 million of funding that has been earmarked for coastal shipping in the 2021 to 2024 National Land Transport Programme. The key recommendations include enhancing domestic shipping services with new services, increased frequencies, and additional ships for new or existing container and bulk services; reducing shipping emissions through testing emerging technologies; improving efficiency with upgrades to rail or road links to and from ports; and, finally, upgrading maritime infrastructure, including shore power connections at ports, small new regional ports, and expanding existing ports.

💬 Naisi Chen: What reaction has he seen to the report?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: There has been widespread interest and support for this development. I note that Doug Paulin, the Sealord CEO, welcomed the report, as has the Maritime Union of New Zealand. The Maritime Union of New Zealand Secretary Craig Harrison said it is good to see core issues being identified, including the need for practical measures to build the coastal shipping mode up to its potential.

Question No. 10—Health (Māori Health)

10. to the Associate Minister of Health (Māori Health): Has he asked the Director-General of Health to release all the data as requested by the Whānau Ora Commissioning Agency yet; if not, why not?

on behalf of the Associate Minister of Health (Māori Health): On behalf of the Associate Minister of Health, since I became aware of the issue of access to Māori patient data by the Whānau Ora Commissioning Agency, I have not asked the director-general to release all the data as requested, but I have made my expectations clear that relevant data should be released in accordance with the Ministry of Health’s legal obligations. Following the first High Court decision on this matter, I have been satisfied that the director-general has, as ordered to do so, reconsidered his decision within three days, and has been taking action to release data. Following the second High Court decision this week, the director-general, as ordered to do so, has continued considering his decision on the provision of data in areas where no agreement had yet been reached, and reviewed his decision in relation to Māori in the North Island who have had only one dose. The member should be aware that under the Public Service Act 2020 and the Cabinet Manual, although the director-general is accountable to Ministers for the exercise of statutory powers or duties, as in this case, it is not for Ministers to direct the director-general on how to discharge those powers or duties.

💬 Harete Hipango: Why has the Minister, in stating he has made expectations known, simply not asked the director-general to release all the relevant individual Māori vaccination data requested by the Whānau Ora Commissioning Agency, with the purpose to drive up Māori vaccination rates?

The director-general, as the head of the ministry in control of data that has been the subject of a request, has a number of statutory duties and obligations to meet, not the least of those under the Privacy Act. These are the issues that have been canvassed in the High Court in two hearings now. The way that the director-general has gone about discharging his obligations both to the requester and to the people about whose information those requests have been about—it is for the director-general to make sure that he is upholding his obligations. It is the director-general and/or the ministry whose decisions are reviewable in court, and it is not for a Minister to direct the director-general on how to make a decision that is reviewable.

💬 Harete Hipango: Why has Healthline, a non-Māori health provider, been given individual Māori vaccination data by the Ministry of Health and the Whānau Ora Commissioning Agency has been blocked?

As I understand it, on behalf of the Minister, the ministry has an agreement with Whakarongorau, the telehealth service that I think the member is referring to, which allows for the disclosure of data. But the ministry, at least until recently, did not have any agreement with the Whānau Ora Commissioning Agency, principally because the data that the ministry held was data that was also held by a range of front-line health providers.

💬 Harete Hipango: Has the Minister asked for any legal advice where there’s a perhaps misconstrued interpretation of the Public Service Act about the responsibility of the Minister to be able to instruct or direct the Director-General of Health as to his powers for such instruction and direction to release the information on Māori vaccination data to the Whānau Ora Commissioning Agency?

Well, on behalf of the Minister, I have to say that I cannot answer that question because although I stand in the House to answer on behalf of the Minister, I do not stand in his shoes in terms of every piece of information that that Minister has received.

💬 Chris Bishop: Has the Minister seen the judgment in Peters v Attorney-General—specifically, paragraph 134—which relates to the responsibility of Ministers and chief executives, which, basically, says the Minister can direct an agency through its chief executive on the operations and conduct of the agency; and why will he not use that as authority to direct the Director-General of Health to release the data requested by Whānau Ora.

It is one thing to direct a chief executive of an agency about operations and conduct of the agency; it is another when that agency or its chief executive have statutory powers and duties that they have to uphold. When it comes to the taking of decisions, in pursuit of powers and duties, it is the decision maker that is subject to review, and it is for the decision maker to make the decision and stand accountable for that decision, if there is judicial review. [Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: No, no, the party’s run out.

Question No. 11—Health

11. to the Associate Minister of Health: How will the Smokefree 2025 Action Plan help achieve the goal of a Smokefree Aotearoa New Zealand?

This morning, I was thrilled to release the Smokefree 2025 Action Plan, which sets out bold measures to further reduce smoking rates and save thousands of lives in New Zealand. We know the majority of smokers want to quit but they can struggle to do so on their own. This plan builds on the good work of quit programmes by drastically reducing the availability of cigarettes, by making them less addictive, and by introducing a smoke-free generation, which will mean that no one aged older than 14 at the time the planned legislation comes into force will ever be able to legally purchase cigarettes. These are world-leading measures which will put us on track to achieve New Zealand’s longstanding goal of being smoke-free by 2025.

💬 Sarah Pallett: Why is it important to reduce the retail availability of cigarettes?

💬 Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: Nicotine is one of the most addictive substances on earth. So having cigarettes to buy in just about every supermarket, petrol station, and convenience store makes it even harder for people trying to quit. Currently, it’s estimated there are up to 8,000 retailers selling cigarettes around the country. The smoke-free action plan will see that number reduced to around 500 outlets by 2024. This will give businesses time to plan for their transition away from tobacco. But, ultimately, it means that people who have decided to quit won’t be passing half a dozen chances to buy a packet of cigarettes every time they walk to their local shops.

💬 Sarah Pallett: How can cigarettes be made less addictive?

💬 Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: Clinical studies have shown that dramatically reducing nicotine levels in cigarettes makes it far easier for people to quit. So the action plan will see New Zealand transition to low-nicotine cigarettes. This is a major change but it is based on clinical research and it is realistic, because with vapes widely available, there is a far less harmful option available for smokers who are addicted to nicotine. Smoking does incredible damage in our communities, particularly in Māori communities. In fact, on our current course, it will be decades before Māori smoking rates drop below 5 percent. This action plan, backed by targeted support through quit programmes and community engagement, can turn the tide and make sure that smoking is not part of our future.

Question No. 12—Prime Minister

12. to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by her statement that “This government will foster a more open and democratic society. It will strengthen transparency around official information”; if so, is she confident that the Government has fulfilled this commitment in relation to releasing information about Groundswell NZ?

on behalf of the Prime Minister: Yes, and yes.

💬 Mark Cameron: Does she believe her decision not to release her media briefing notes on the Groundswell protest, under the Official Information Act, complies with her commitment to “strengthen transparency around official information”, and, if so, why?

Yes.

💬 Mark Cameron: Does she believe it is in the public interest to not release media briefing notes for the Groundswell protest, which have occurred across New Zealand, and, if not, what does this say about the Government’s attitude towards openness?

Yes.