Oral Questions

1. to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by all her Government’s policies and actions?

Yes. In particular, I stand by this Government’s decision to reconnect New Zealanders with the world as our public health advice confirms it is safe to do so. That is why, on advice from the Strategic COVID-19 Public Health Advisory Group and the Director-General of Health, the Government has removed the requirement for fully vaccinated travellers to self-isolate. In addition, the Government has announced it will bring step 2 forward so that New Zealanders from the rest of the world outside of Australia will be able to return home after midnight this Friday. We’re expecting advice shortly on whether we can bring forward the remaining reconnecting steps, including international tourism. Managed isolation has been a crucial factor in our success as a team in responding to COVID-19, and I want to take this opportunity to thank all of the managed isolation and quarantine workers who, for almost two years, have worked so hard to keep us all safe.

💬 David Seymour: Can the Prime Minister tell the House how many COVID-19 cases and hospitalisations will result from her decision to allow New Zealanders to enter the country without isolating from this week, and how many cases would have arisen from a decision to let foreigners enter the country without isolation from this week, and if she can tell us—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! That’s two questions.

💬 David Seymour: It’s one question, Mr Speaker.

💬 SPEAKER: It is two questions.

💬 David Seymour: It’s a contrast between two figures.

💬 SPEAKER: It doesn’t matter where your brackets are. The member’s asked for two different numbers; that’s two questions.

💬 David Seymour: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I—

💬 SPEAKER: No, the member’s finished his question.

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: If the member would be so—if I could so put it—brave or bold to put his questions on notice, I would be happy to provide the specific modelling that we receive as a Government when making these decisions. However—

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Brave or bold—brave or bold?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: However, Mr Brownlee, for step 2 of the reconnection, under self-isolation requirements, we could expect between 100 and 485 cases to enter into New Zealand. However, that is with an estimate of 65 percent of cases being impacted by self-isolation. So when it comes to the number that would come in without self-isolation, you can assume it will be higher, and, of course, higher still if you have more than, say, 10,000 entries, which is what that modelling is based on.

💬 David Seymour: Is the Prime Minister seriously telling New Zealand she just decided to let New Zealanders in—but not foreigners—without isolation, she doesn’t know what the impacts of those decisions will be on case and hospitalisation numbers, but if David Seymour put the question on notice at question time, she would know that critical information?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Perhaps the member would choose to listen to the answer. With 10,000 arrivals in New Zealand, we have an estimate of between 100 and 485 cases coming in at the border. However, that is modelled with seven days of self-solation, so you would expect a higher rate of cases if you were not to have self-isolation. You would expect even further cases if you have not just 10,000 entries but tens of thousands of entries. We have asked our experts to consider what the likely impact would be of bringing forward tourism and a wider reopening. As you will have heard Professor David Skegg say yesterday, his initial response to that question is that you would wish to wait until after New Zealand has come through the peak of Omicron to ensure that New Zealanders in-country have the ability to get the response from their health system they need while we experience this significant pandemic.

💬 David Seymour: So how many cases would New Zealand expect, and how many additional hospitalisations, if the border was to be opened without isolation, and based on that answer, has she considered the cost—

💬 SPEAKER: That’s two questions again, Mr Seymour.

💬 David Seymour: —of keeping the borders closed to New Zealand business?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I’m not going to traverse the answer for a third time because I don’t wish to waste the member’s supplementaries. On the last part of his question—have we considered the cost of business—of course, at all times we consider the impact on the likes of tourism, on the likes of our regional economies, but we must also factor in the impact on our health system. Our health system is doing an extraordinary job at present, but we do have close to 400 hospitalisations at the moment and we have not yet reached our peak of this Omicron wave. To simply carte blanche open the borders—as the member is suggesting and as the member has suggested consistently through this pandemic, might I add—would be at a great cost, potentially, to New Zealanders, and we’re not willing to do that at this time.

💬 David Seymour: If the Prime Minister can’t put a number on additional cases and hospitalisations from letting foreigners enter the country without hospitalisation, then how do people avoid the conclusion that she’s just making it up and the decision making is now not based on evidence but entirely political?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I utterly reject the premise of that member’s question, and if he had listened to Professor Skegg yesterday, he himself made the point that the reason they have given the advice that we can open up at this stage to New Zealanders and those who are otherwise eligible is because of the Te Pūnaha Matatini modelling that suggests that the numbers we would have are numbers that we can manage in-country at this point. He also went on to suggest that a wider reopening would be something that you would wish to consider after you’ve come through the wave. I would also acknowledge Philip Hill, who is a member of that advisory committee. He believed that we should actually wait to even reopen to New Zealanders without self-isolation until after the peak. I’ll finish with a quote from Professor Skegg’s letter: “In November 2021, for example, there were concerted calls to drop all quarantine requirements for most vaccinated people arriving in Auckland, on the grounds that such travellers were less likely to be infected than Auckland residents at this time. This would have led to a major increase in Delta cases. Fortunately, the Government did not yield to the pressure, so our Delta outbreak was brought under control before the arrival of Omicron. In Australia, hospitals were still struggling to deal with the very large number of sick patients infected with the Delta variant when the Omicron outbreak took off.” That is sage advice from a public health expert, and we will continue to seek the advice of experts before making such significant decisions, rather than the view of that member.

💬 David Seymour: Does the Prime Minister accept that every time I’ve put down a specific question to her on notice this Parliament, she has transferred it to another Minister to answer, and, regardless of her answer to that question, will she commit to answer questions put to her in future?

💬 SPEAKER: Order! No, that question is ironic.

💬 David Seymour: Point of order. Mr Speaker—

💬 SPEAKER: The Prime Minister has no option but to answer questions which are put to her in this House. That is an obligation of the Prime Minister. For the member to suggest that she doesn’t is wrong. The member knows it’s wrong and he’s being deliberately disorderly. If he continues this, I will regard him as being grossly disorderly.

💬 David Seymour: Point of order. Mr Speaker, if I can clarify—I have no intention to be disorderly. The point I’m making is that the Prime Minister—and you accepted the answer—criticised me for not putting a more specific question on notice. I was simply asking her if in the future, if I put specific questions on notice, will she not transfer them to other Ministers, as she always has? I think people have—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! The member has now said that four times. Does the member want a further supplementary?

💬 David Seymour: Of the 344 people reported to be hospitalised yesterday with COVID-19, how many were admitted with COVID-19 and how many were admitted for another reason and then tested for COVID-19 once in hospital?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Speaking to that question directly, we have asked a number of times whether or not it’s possible to provide a breakdown. We’ve had the clinical leads in the Northern region give us their estimates. It is not at all the majority—the vast majority are admitted for COVID—but there is a portion who may, for instance, come in for broken arms, appendicitis, who are tested as part of the surveillance testing at A & E and picked up for having COVID. But it is, as I say, not the majority of cases. I’d also point out that, actually, that is the case for most countries we would compare ourselves to. They also record everyone with COVID. So if you’re comparing hospitalisation rates, we are still comparing apples with apples. To conclude, I look forward to answering that member’s question at No. 9, specifically on notice, on Ukraine, as the Prime Minister—untransferred.

💬 SPEAKER: The Prime Minister will put her mask on and then I’ll call someone else.

Question No. 2—Finance

2. to the Minister of Finance: What recent reports has he seen on the New Zealand economy?

Mr Speaker—[Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: I’ve never regarded the Minister for COVID as a wet, but—the Hon Grant Robertson.

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The international credit ratings agency Standard & Poor’s reaffirmed New Zealand’s local currency credit rating to triple A and the foreign currency rating to AA+, both with a stable outlook. The agency once again praised the Government, saying New Zealand had weathered the pandemic better than most countries in terms of health, fiscal, and economic outcomes.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: How’s business confidence?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Mr Bridges, I prefer the international ratings agency than your reckons on this matter. Mr Speaker, Standard & Poor’s report is recognition that the Government’s continued health-led response to the ongoing pandemic strategy has been the right one for the economy.

💬 Dr Duncan Webb: What else did the report say about New Zealand’s financial position?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Standard & Poor’s noted that New Zealand’s relatively better management of the pandemic meant the country’s credit position can withstand the potential damage of the shock to the economy. The agency is forecasting New Zealand’s fiscal deficits to narrow materially from the June 2023 fiscal year towards a surplus in 2025. This is expected to ease pressure on the Government’s debt levels. Standard & Poor’s said that while debt is much higher than in the past due to responding to the pandemic, it remains below most of New Zealand’s peers. It noted that if Budget deficits in the future were less than 1 percent of GDP, the foreign currency credit rating could be upgraded to triple A, in line with the country’s triple A local currency credit rating.

💬 Dr Duncan Webb: Why are credit ratings important?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Well, otherwise we’d be left with the reckons of the Opposition finance spokesperson! But in this case, the ratings are important for ensuring that the cost of our borrowing remains low. Our triple A and AA+ plus ratings give people more confidence that New Zealand is a good place to invest. It also helps ensure our debt-servicing costs are kept as low as possible. Overall, the upgrade is a sign of confidence in the economy and that the hard work of New Zealanders and Government decisions have put us in a strong position to recover from the ongoing pandemic and that no one is listening to the Opposition finance spokesperson run down New Zealanders and run down their hard work in growing the economy.

Question No. 3—Prime Minister

3. to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by all of her Government’s statements and actions?

Yes. Overnight, New Zealand and the United Kingdom signed a historic free-trade agreement eliminating all tariffs on New Zealand’s exports, with duties removed on 99.5 percent of current trade from entry into force. This deal is expected to save our exporters $37 million per year on tariff elimination alone, and boost New Zealand’s GDP between $700 million and $1 billion, and the agreement will be welcomed by key sectors across the country. The agreement is a major milestone in this Government’s plan to accelerate our recovery from COVID-19 and grow our exports. This is also our first bilateral trade agreement to include a specific article on climate change, and provisions towards eliminating environmentally harmful subsidies such as fossil fuel subsidies. I’m pleased to see that the other side of the House is celebrating this agreement with us.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Does she accept we have a cost of living crisis, when Kiwis are paying hundreds more at the checkout and hundreds more at the pump, compared to a year ago?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I, of course, keep a close eye on those petrol pump prices, as members around me well know, and that is, of course, one of the contributing factors that we’ve seen in recent times. We’ve heard much commentary around the impact on fuel prices—most recently Ukraine impacting the supply chains, issues caused by COVID, and increases in demand—and that is being felt here in New Zealand. We do expect, of course, as the Governor of the Reserve Bank has said, for that to peak and then start to come away. But we are not the only country experiencing this at present. It’s why we’ve made changes like, for instance, increases in benefit, minimum wage changes, and the increase in the family tax credit.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Does she agree with media reports that the average Kiwi is paying $5,000 more a year for food, petrol, and housing than a year ago?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: It’s one of the reasons we keep a very close eye on what’s happening with wages, as well. You would have seen from last week the release of those household income surveys an increase in the median wage of over 5 percent. We’ve worked very hard as a Government to make sure that, in terms of housing affordability, we see incomes grow, and that we see incomes grow over and above those increases that they see in the cost of living. That has been occurring until more recent times when we, alongside many other countries, have seen the impact of a simultaneous COVID recovery, and its impact on inflation.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Is she honestly saying that Kiwis who have seen their real incomes fall over the past year shouldn’t be concerned because inflation four years ago wasn’t that bad?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: No, what I am pointing to is our record.

💬 Christopher Luxon: How are renters supposed to get ahead when annual rents have gone up by more than $7,000 under her Government?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I’d note, under that member’s Government, rents, of course, continued to increase as well. Of course, over the last year rental costs have increased at about 5.4 percent; average household disposable income at 5.1 percent. Now, of course, we want to see that in reverse, which has been a goal of this Government and continues to be. It’s why we’ve taken the measures we have on housing. It’s why also we have taken the measures we have to lift the incomes of low and middle income earners.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Does she agree with economist Brad Olsen, who warns that costs are going to keep rising, which means “It’s harder and harder to put food on the table and keep a roof over your head.”; if not, why not?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: What I look to are the projections beyond what is an extraordinary period right now in our history—a one-in-100-year pandemic and the economic impacts from that. And you can see those who are looking ahead, forecasting that we will come out the other side of that extraordinary period where constraints on supply, increases in demand are having an impact on inflation, and you’ve seen the Reserve Bank commentating on when they expect that to be. In the meantime, we do have a job to do as Government to make sure that we’re supporting families through that period in things like that increase in the family tax credit, benefit increases, and increases in the minimum wage, which I note the Opposition have not supported, and, therefore, I really question what it is the member is proposing that he would do to support families through this time.

💬 Christopher Luxon: What tools beyond interest rates does she believe the Government has to rein in inflation?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Well, I note that the member believes that it all comes down to our spending in core areas. So my question to him would be: does he plan to cut the thousands of nurses we’re invested in or does he perhaps intend to cut the teachers?

💬 SPEAKER: No, no. Order! There’s a one-way track for questions in this one and the member’s not allowed to ask the Leader of the Opposition questions.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Are you going to make the Prime Minister actually answer the question the Leader of the Opposition gave?

💬 SPEAKER: Well, some of us could just about take the inference from the question that there might be another tool which the Prime Minister was asking the Leader of the Opposition if he supported. It was wrong of her to ask about his support for that tool, but not to mention it.

💬 Christopher Luxon: When she said, “Look, I acknowledge that there will be times when Government policies will have an impact on inflation.”, which specific policies was she referring to?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I certainly wasn’t referring to cameras on boats, which is the only thing the member has pointed to. Look, to answer both this question and his previous one, what we have continually pointed to is the international environment that we’re in presently and the impact it’s having on inflation—of course, examples like fuel being a critical component of the inflation increases we’ve seen. But we’re not alone in that, and I would reflect on the comments that have been made by the Reserve Bank, where “Global inflation is expected to peak during 2022 and then moderate as supply disruptions are gradually resolved.” So we are referring to both those as having an impact right now but also, when that abates, we’ll also likely see inflation come away. In the meantime, the Leader of the Opposition seems to be suggesting that we should not have invested in the wage subsidy, that we should not have invested in our health response, or perhaps he’s referring to our core Crown investment in things like teachers, nurses, and their wages. If he suggests that we should cut those, he needs to be honest with New Zealand.

💬 David Seymour: Point of order. You have often cut off and restricted questions for going well beyond their relevance and scope. How is it possibly helping the House get answers to questions to have the Prime Minister speculate—

💬 SPEAKER: The member will resume his seat—[Interruption] The member will resume his seat. Judgment on the lengths of questions and answers is mine and mine alone, and it is disorderly to bring it up by point of order. The member’s had two warnings. If he is disorderly again today, he won’t be in the Chamber.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Are falling real incomes just the price that Kiwis have to pay for her Government’s desire to spend billions on vanity projects like underground trams?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I completely reject the premise of that question—and what I point to is a record by this Government in making decisions that boost the incomes of particularly our low and middle income New Zealanders and where we have seen wages outstrip the increase in the cost of living. And the member’s reference to some projects I’ve seen, he’s, on the one hand, said that he wants to cut transport projects; on the other, he’s had members out there at the ribbon cutting, supporting them.

Question No. 4—Energy and Resources

4. to the Minister of Energy and Resources: What action is the Government taking to decarbonise New Zealand’s transport sector?

The Prime Minister and I recently announced the successful projects that the Government is co-funding through the first two rounds of the Low Emissions Transport Fund. The fund is about demonstrating and adopting high potential low emission transport technologies, innovation, and infrastructure to help accelerate and maximise the decarbonisation of how we power our transport sector. The $6.45 million of Government funding is being matched by more than $9 million of private sector co-funding.

💬 Rachel Brooking: What notable projects have been funded in the first Low Emissions Transport Fund round?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Just three examples of projects being funded are: Firth Industries who will deploy New Zealand’s first electric battery-swap concrete mixer truck; we’re working with Fonterra to enable New Zealand’s first electric milk tanker—the tanker will operate with battery-swap technology at the Waitoa Depot near Tauranga; and Bayes Coachlines will provide a passenger bus with solar panels, providing 5 to 10 percent of its own power. These projects are helping demonstrate what is technically and commercially viable, enabling businesses to invest in their own decarbonisation with greater confidence.

💬 Rachel Brooking: What investments have been made in charging infrastructure through the Low Emissions Transport Fund rounds?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: The Government continues to invest to build network coverage and accelerate the roll-out of the nationwide electric vehicle charging network. The funding has enabled a faster roll-out of a further 25 chargers distributed around the country, including in Te Tai Tokerau, Napier, New Plymouth, Masterton, Christchurch, and Rākaia. The latest investment increases the number of chargers the Government has supported since 2017 to 1,313. Further investment will be focused on filling gaps in New Zealand’s charging network. We are now seeing real progress in the roll-out, with more people able to access charging infrastructure where and when they need it.

💬 Simeon Brown: Has the Minister seen the Waikato Chamber of Commerce report which states the Te Huia train service emits 11 kilograms more carbon dioxide per passenger than people using their own cars between Hamilton and Auckland, and if so will she be advising the Minister of Transport to cancel this service to help reduce New Zealand’s carbon footprint?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Yes, I have seen that report, and so has my colleague, the Minister of Housing, who I have discussed it with. Funding this service, and ensuring that we are planning for the future is critical not only for looking how it is we are going to provide housing in the future but the way that we do that in a decarbonised and low emissions way. So no, I will not be recommending cutting such an important service.

Question No. 5—Finance

5. to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by all his statements and actions on the cost of living?

Yes, in their context.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Does he accept what the Reserve Bank’s Monetary Policy Committee said last week in its Monetary Policy Statement that “Wage growth continues to lag CPI inflation.”, making many Kiwis poorer, and, if so, what does he intend to do about it?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Well, on this side of the House we have a very clear position that increasing the minimum wage is one way to begin to do that, in contrast to the Opposition, who have three different positions: one where the member says it’s not on, one where Nicola Willis says it is, and one where Chris Luxon can’t make up his mind.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Does he also accept that in order to rein in the inflation the Monetary Policy Statement foresees, the official cash rate increases to 140 basis points over the next couple of years to over 3 percent, meaning higher interest rates and, again, less money for many Kiwis, and, if so, what does he intend to do about that?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I know the member is new to his portfolio but I’m pretty sure he will be aware that the setting of the official cash rate is the responsibility of the Reserve Bank, just as in 2014 and 2015 when that member was a Minister and the official cash rate was 3.5 percent it was the responsibility of the Reserve Bank.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Does he accept what the ANZ has said recently that “a higher than otherwise official cash rate may be needed to lean against even more fiscal stimulus come Budget 2022” or, in other words, his spending may be forcing interest rates higher than they need to be, hurting even more Kiwis?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: No, and on this side of the House, as we’ve continually done over the four years that we’ve been here, we will make sure that there is a careful balance between spending that we need to do in the economy and to support New Zealanders and a fiscal balance. The member opposite failed when he was on television the other day to actually be able to say what he’d cut. What’s he not going to do?

💬 SPEAKER: Order! I think the member is beginning to go a bit far in these matters, but I will say to the member asking the question that I was probably a little lax in letting him have his first supplementary, which didn’t relate to the primary question.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: What part of the ANZ’s recent statement that “It is simply not sustainable for the Government to keep spending at the pace it has been.” doesn’t he understand?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The member will note from the forecasts that were included in the Budget Policy Statement that spending does begin to track down after the one-off increase that there will be in this year’s Budget, and I would note to the member that spending in response to a crisis is not new. The previous National Government did it and saw spending as a percentage of GDP rise to just over 34 percent, very similar to where we are now.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Wasn’t he correct in 2019 when he told RNZ, “What I do know is that fiscal and monetary policy do need to work together”, and if so, why can’t he now in the lead-up to Budget 2022 take his own advice and rein in the big Government spending?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I most certainly was right in 2019, if I can say so modestly. What I would say is that we have seen fiscal and monetary policy work together to get New Zealanders through this particular global crisis that we’re seeing. I can only refer to the words of novice economic commentator Simon Bridges, who said on television the other day, “I’ve also made clear, inflation is international.”

Question No. 6—COVID-19 Response

6. to the Minister for COVID-19 Response: Is he confident the current COVID-19 response settings are informed by best evidence on how to protect people from this virus without using lockdowns?

💬 SPEAKER: Before I call the member, can I just ask the people who are running the TV system, having Dr Woods as a background is probably not the best use of the time.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Yes. The Government’s overall response to COVID-19 has put the safety and interests of all New Zealanders squarely at its centre, combined with input from experts and the latest evidence, which has meant that New Zealand has had one of the lowest hospitalisation and death rates as a result of COVID-19 in the world.

💬 Dr Elizabeth Kerekere: What steps is the Government taking to protect the health and safety of especially health workers, who may be exposed to COVID-19 at their workplace?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Our hospitals and our health system as a whole have good training and good knowledge around infection prevention and control, and our experts have been working with them to ensure that they have access to all of the resources that they need. So if I think about N95 masks, for example, we have been making sure that we have a plentiful supply of those for our front-line health workforce, and that includes in the broader health workforce—so places like aged residential care, those working to provide health services to those with disabilities, and so on have access to N95 masks. In terms of other workers, we’ve been making sure they’ve had access to what we colloquially call the surgical masks—so those ones with the blue frontages—which are also very, very effective. In addition to that, we have put in place a Close Contact Exemption Scheme, which means that only those who absolutely have to go back to work should be going back to work if they have a household contact who has COVID-19, because that also helps to keep them and others safe in the workplace.

💬 Dr Elizabeth Kerekere: Further to that, what steps has the Government taken to ensure that supply of N95 masks or equivalent are distributed to the rest of the New Zealanders during the Omicron outbreak?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: There is a limited supply of N95 masks and they are, of course, significantly more expensive than the other masks that we have available. So the workforces that they have been supplied to include aged residential care facilities, disability support services, homecare support services, mental health and addiction services, and pharmacy, who have been able to access them through the Ministry of Health. Others, of course, are able to purchase their own, but as I indicated, it is more expensive. To ensure that people have access to quality masks, though, those other surgical masks have been available, and the Ministry of Health has been working to make them available through the Ministry of Education, and through the Ministry of Social Development, where they’re being distributed to organisations like food banks and other avenues. Te Arawhiti have been working with iwi providers to make sure they’re available. The Ministry for Pacific Peoples have been making them available, including through church networks; the Ministry for Ethnic Communities have them available; and around 750,000 masks have been made available to community health providers, who are servicing wide regional networks as a one-off supply. So we have been making sure that there are appropriate masks available for the particular context.

💬 Dr Elizabeth Kerekere: Is he aware that tamariki Māori in rural areas have the lowest vaccination rate of all children, and, if so, does he intend to urgently increase resources to Māori providers for vaccine outreach?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Yes, I am aware of that statistic, and it is a stat that we should all be concerned about. We have put significant additional resourcing into our Māori health providers in order to try and reach into some of those communities. It is a more challenging group of people to reach and we need to be patient there. One of the things that I’m acutely aware of is that the feedback we get from those communities is that they don’t want to be stigmatised by the discussion of vaccination, and that also we are experiencing quite significant pockets of vaccine hesitancy and misinformation in those communities, and the best way to approach that is carefully and patiently, and that is exactly what those health providers are doing, and they have our full support to do that.

💬 Dr Elizabeth Kerekere: What advice, if any, has he received on instituting a test-to-stay policy for close contacts in schools and early childhood centres, as has been used overseas to limit classroom transmission?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: That is something that we keep under close review. One of the things that we have stressed to schools and early learning services is that they should only be accessing the Close Contact Exemption Scheme for their staff where that is an absolute last resort because, in most cases, in fact, schools and early childhood services will have other things that they can do to keep those people who have a household contact who has COVID-19 out of the workplace. In terms of the broader student population, though, that is something that we are keeping under review, and it may well be that, as we sort of head towards the peak of this particular Omicron outbreak, we do more in that area.

💬 Dr Elizabeth Kerekere: Is he confident that the community care available during phase 3 will be able to identify people who need hospitalisation, including due to low oxygen levels, and provide timely hospital transfers?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: This is, of course, one of the things that we have worked through very, very carefully. There is no system that is absolutely foolproof here, and we do rely on people self-monitoring for symptoms—and reporting back in where their symptoms start to change. So a really, really important message for anybody who is at home isolating because they have COVID-19: if their symptoms worsen, if they are starting to experience significant health impacts, then ring 111. That is exactly what they should do because we want to make sure that they’re getting the healthcare that they need. It is important that, for those who have relatively mild symptoms, that they stay home and they get better, and they make sure that those health services are available to those who really need them, whose symptoms could be getting worse.

Question No. 7—Health

7. to the Minister of Health: How many inpatient events have been cancelled, in total, since the Delta strain lockdown on 17 August 2021, and how many people are currently waiting more than four months for a first specialist assessment?

The Ministry of Health’s latest reporting for the week ending 20 February 2022 estimates that approximately 7,219 in-patient elective procedures were deferred nationally due to COVID-19 since August 2021. As the member will be aware from my answer to his written question, these are estimates subject to revision by DHBs. Results for December 2021 show that there are 32,896 patients waiting longer than four months for a first specialist appointment. This compares to 19,765 in September 2021.

As I have said in this House previously, the reality is that pandemics disrupt health systems. All services reduce procedures in order to keep patients and health workers safe. Every effort is being made to reduce the disruption of planned care. Since the alert level 4 was lifted on 21 September 2021, many of the DHBs have reduced waiting times in their planned care schedule. DHBs have put a number of measures in place to maintain delivery. This includes prioritising urgent and non-deferrable cases, outsourcing where possible, running additional surgical lists and extending the use of providers that can deliver minor procedures in a day-case environment. We know that the Auckland based DHBs—Auckland, Counties Manukau, and Waitematā—have continued to be at the centre of the response to the latest outbreak and continue to see disruption to their schedules, but even these DHBs have worked immensely hard to keep delivering services and have lifted their delivery.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: When he said recently that the management of the health system had been “somewhat of a leader in terms of minimising harm”, how does he explain his answer to written questions last week that a woman in Taranaki has now been waiting 789 days for a first specialist assessment?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: What that member fails to mention is of course that for some of those outlier and exceptional cases, there are a number of factors that sit behind the delay of their first specialist appointment, often including the patient’s own request for a delay. I think what’s important—as the member will know as a health specialist and health researcher—is that, you know, we tend to look at mediums and means as indicative of the performance of the system. In any event, what we can say is that although the system in the early stage of the August outbreak cancelled and deferred procedures, since then many of those procedures have managed to catch up and, in fact, in December what we saw across the public health system as a whole—85 percent achievement of planned care procedures against that plan, which was a significant improvement in previous months given the disruption caused by the pandemic.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: Does he believe he has minimised harm to the woman at North Shore Hospital who has been on the priority 1 waiting list since July, with specialist concerns that she may have thyroid cancer, who has now been told this type of elective surgery has been cancelled?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I’m not familiar with that individual case and even if I were I wouldn’t be disclosing patient details in a public forum such as this. What I can say is that I am satisfied with the response of our DHBs, including Waitematā and all those Auckland DHBs, who have been under immense pressure responding to the Delta outbreak since August and now the Omicron outbreak, now seeing over 300 patients admitted just in the last few weeks alone for treatment, having to again defer procedures. They are doing what they need to do, what they can do, safely and properly, to keep patients well and staff safe, and they are doing what clinicians do in these circumstances: appropriately prioritising and triaging and keeping as many people as safe as possible.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: How has his leadership minimised harm to people with lung cancer who the cancer agency state have had a 30 percent fall in bronchoscopies?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: One thing this Government has done is increase funding to Pharmac by 25 percent because it was virtually static under the previous Government, and we have significantly added a number of cancer treatments funded by Pharmac too. In fact, we added, outside the Budget cycle, another $60 million to enable Pharmac to fund additional cancer treatments. We have continued the roll-out of the bowel screening programme because that was underfunded by the previous Government when it started. We’ve all but completed the roll-out of that programme. This is a Government, through those measures and the establishment of the Cancer Control Agency, that takes cancer seriously in a way that never has been before.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: How has his leadership minimised harm from the report of 147 surgeries that were cancelled at Counties Manukau in the past two weeks?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I don’t know whether the member has noticed, but we’re not only two years into a pandemic but we are, sort of, about three weeks into one of the most significant outbreaks of the total COVID pandemic that we have ever seen. So we’re now up to, roughly, 100,000 active cases in our communities right across New Zealand. We have over 300 people in hospital in Auckland alone as a consequence of the pandemic. The DHBs have been planning for this, but part of their planning is to make sure they have room in hospital for the people with the very serious respiratory conditions they’ve got as a consequence of COVID, and that has meant deferring planned care. That is what they are doing. It is a perfectly orthodox, normal response to a pandemic that our DHBs are responding to appropriately.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: When the director-general said today that the staffing of hospital beds is an issue that will have an impact on in-patient procedures, how many staffed hospital beds are currently available across New Zealand?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I’m not quite sure what the member is referring to by staffed hospital beds, but I do point out to the member, one of the other consequences of the outbreak is that when staff are household contacts and are required under current protocols to isolate, that does have an impact on the staffing of hospitals, and that is happening now too. So part of the planning of the DHBs is not only planning for a significant increase in the number of patients with COVID who need treatment—particularly for those difficult respiratory conditions—but also planning for a reduction in staff because they have to respond to their exposure or risk of infection, particularly when they are a household contact. That has all been planned for, that is being played out at the moment, and staff and patients are being kept safe as a result.

Question No. 8—COVID-19 Response

8. to the Minister for COVID-19 Response: What recent announcements has the Government made on reconnecting New Zealand to the rest of the world?

Yesterday Cabinet agreed to remove the self-isolation requirements for fully vaccinated travellers. Advice from the Strategic COVID-19 Public Health Advisory Group and the Director-General of Health is that it’s now an appropriate time to drop the requirement for self-isolation for fully vaccinated travellers after they arrive in New Zealand. We were already in the process of removing the requirement for managed isolation and quarantine (MIQ) for that group. Now that we are two years into the pandemic, the balance of risk has shifted from our border and into our community. As the pandemic evolves, we are evolving in our response as well. Getting tested is now quicker and easier, requirements for isolation have been simplified to only those who share a household, and care in the community is focused towards those who are most in need of support.

💬 Tangi Utikere: When will this change come into effect, and what will it mean for New Zealanders overseas?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: From 11.59 p.m. on Wednesday, 2 March—so tomorrow night—vaccinated travellers entering New Zealand will no longer need to self-isolate. That means that Kiwis coming home will be able to step off the plane and immediately—once they’ve been through customs—connect with family and friends and enjoy all that New Zealand has to offer. The Government’s also confirmed that we’ll be bringing forward step 2 so that New Zealanders from the rest of the world can return from midnight this Friday, 4 March. Cabinet is also going to be regularly reviewing the remaining steps over the coming weeks.

💬 Tangi Utikere: What requirements will remain on international returnees in order to protect the safety of all New Zealanders?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Travellers will still be required to have a negative pre-departure test before they board a flight to New Zealand, and they will need to undertake two rapid antigen tests, the first when they arrive in New Zealand, and the second five or six days after they have arrived here. If they return a positive result, they’ll be required to report that result and isolate for the same period as a community case of COVID-19. Returnees will also be asked to follow up any positive rapid antigen tests with a PCR test. That will allow us to run whole genome sequencing for new cases that have been detected amongst people who have come across the border, which will help us to determine any new variants that might be coming into the country. That means that we can keep tabs on what’s happening at our border and the emergence of any new variants that could be of concern to us.

💬 Chris Bishop: What instructions, if any, have been given to MIQ staff around processing applications for early release from MIQ in the last week, and what does he say to Michael Brown, who was recently denied early release to visit his father in ICU just yesterday despite testing negative three times in a row over the last five days?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I won’t comment on individual cases in MIQ, as has long been my practice of doing that. But in terms of the early release from MIQ, people will be released from MIQ early as a result of the announcements that we made yesterday.

💬 Tangi Utikere: In response to my earlier question to the Minister, what impact will these decisions have on the ongoing use of MIQ?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: It will have a significant impact on the use of MIQ, and can I begin by picking up where the Prime Minister left off in her earlier comments of thanking all those who have been involved in running our managed isolation and quarantine facilities over the last two years. I want to acknowledge that it has been a difficult job—it’s been more difficult at some times than others—and many of those who have been doing that work have paid a significant personal cost for their involvement in MIQ. So I want to extend a very genuine thanks to them for their commitment. Their hard work is one of the reasons New Zealand has enjoyed such long periods of being COVID-free, and so we thank them. We will now be starting to scale back our MIQ operations. It will have an impact on those workers, and we’ll be talking to them about that over the next few weeks. We do expect to retain some MIQ capacity, so we’ll still need that at the moment for unvaccinated travellers and potentially also to support some of those cases in the community who are unable to isolate safely if they need to. So there will still need to be some MIQ capacity, but we’ll be working through that over the next week or two.

Question No. 9—Prime Minister

9. to the Prime Minister: Is the New Zealand Government planning to take further measures to support Ukraine and stand against Russia’s unprovoked invasion; if so, what is stopping the Government from implementing these measures right now?

Yes. As I said in the motion earlier today, New Zealand has not yet reached the extent of the measures we will take to condemn the recent unprovoked and unjustified invasion of Ukraine by Russia. We will continue to look at measures to condemn this act of war, including measures to target Russian finances. To this effect, after exploring the role our Overseas Investment Office and Overseas Investment Act could play in further restricting incoming investment, we have subsequently sought advice on a specific Russian sanctions bill. We expect to engage with other parties on this course of action shortly. As a country, we moved quickly in condemning the invasion and immediately implemented a number of measures in response to Russia’s actions, some of which are covered by other countries’ sanction regimes or are at least similar. All put us in line with our partners’ response. These are: targeted travel bans against Russian Government officials and other individuals associated with the invasion of Ukraine, the prohibition of the export of all goods to Russian military and security forces, and the suspension of bilateral foreign ministry consultations until further notice. New Zealand is also contributing to the humanitarian effort and has provided an initial $2 million in humanitarian aid to support those in Ukraine, and we’re continuing to work through options that are consistent with New Zealand’s unequivocal opposition to Russia’s actions.

Brooke van Velden: Does she agree that if New Zealand’s laws now currently allowed the Government to impose stronger sanctions, we would be better placed to stand with other liberal democracies against Russia’s aggression, and if so, will the Government introduce an autonomous sanctions regime under urgency?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I reject the premise of the member’s question that we are not standing with other international counterparts. We very much are. You’ll see they’ve introduced export restrictions, as we have. They have introduced travel bans, as we have. We were an early mover on humanitarian assistance, as we often are. Where there perhaps are differences are, for instance, where countries have made moves through SWIFT—that is not something that New Zealand has a contribution to make, given the way that system works; the freezing of Russia’s central bank assets; or bans on exports to Russia that extend beyond dual-use goods. That includes aircraft and oil refinery equipment or, for instance, freezing, for example, Nord Stream 2. So you’ll see that where there has been a difference in approach by countries, it’s often been because they have a very targeted area which would be impactful for Russia that perhaps is less so for us. That does not mean that there isn’t more we can do, and we already are exploring a targeted piece of law.

Brooke van Velden: Will the Government consider fast-tracking Critical Purpose Visitor Visas for citizens of Ukraine who have family or work connections here, and then make them eligible for residence as refugees once in New Zealand, similar to what it did for refugees from Afghanistan last year?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: So the Minister has already been liaising with his department over prioritising urgent visa applications from Ukrainian nationals. My understanding is that they’re already in a position to do that and are doing that. When it comes to the processing of refugee applications or inclusion of refugees generally, obviously we have doubled our quota for refugees. That enables us greater capacity. Of course, there is pressure from a number of crises in that regard, but we always work through the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees for that category, and so there’s obviously a process to go through there, but we do have more capacity than we did under the last Government.

Brooke van Velden: Will the Government consider allowing businesses to sponsor refugees from Ukraine if they agree to cover housing, health, and other costs, and if not, why not?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Currently there is the ability of community organisations to be a part of that kind of programme. I couldn’t speak specifically to the current scale of that. Obviously, some of our refugee quota has been impacted by COVID. We have, however, taken very direct action to at least make sure that did not act as a blockage to us responding immediately to the crisis in Afghanistan. It’s fair to say that has put pressure on our community organisations who traditionally work with refugees. My final point: Ukraine wants us to get their home back, so of course we have to be mindful of what role we can play in the future for those who may not wish to return, but we also have to make sure at the same time we are not giving up on their ability to return to their homeland, and that is where a strong focus of New Zealand and all like-minded partners is.

Brooke van Velden: Point of order, Mr Speaker. My question was relatively specific about businesses being able to sponsor refugees, rather than community organisations, and the programme that the Prime Minister mentioned is specific to approved community organisations.

💬 SPEAKER: I will ask the Prime Minister to elaborate on her answer.

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I thought it was implicit in my response that what we currently have is a community-based sponsorship regime. When it comes to businesses, of course, they tend to do that through work visas.

Brooke van Velden: Will the Government expel the Russian ambassador from New Zealand?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: We’ve not removed any options from the table at present. I would note that that is a significant step that hasn’t been taken by many at this stage, and in part that is because at the same time we have to factor in our ability to continue to look after New Zealanders in the region too. So there is that consequence. My understanding is that at present there have been some who have recalled their own representation—only, I believe, three countries have done that at this stage. But, as I’ve said, nothing is off the table.

Question No. 10—Building and Construction

10. to the Minister for Building and Construction: What recent reports has she seen regarding education and employment opportunities in the building and construction sector?

I have seen a report that shows employment and education opportunities in the construction sector are on the rise, outperforming targets set by the Construction Skills Action Plan in 2018. This is a result of a strong role the sector is playing to support COVID-19 recovery, enabled by this Government’s significant investment in infrastructure and housing. Since we launched the Construction Skills Action Plan, over 30,000 people have been supported into construction-related education or employment opportunities. I’m pleased to report that this milestone has exceeded the action plan’s target by more than sevenfold. This Government will continue to invest in our construction sector to ensure we have the skills, capacity, and capabilities we need to build back better from COVID-19.

💬 Arena Williams: Thank you, Mr Speaker. What initiatives has the Government put in place to help deliver the Construction Skills Action Plan?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: Much of the success of the Construction Skills Action Plan is the result of a coordinated effort between Government departments and sector employers to play our part in growing talent in the sector. We have put in place a number of initiatives to deliver on the action plan, such as Mana in Mahi—thank you, Minister Sepuloni—which, as of October last year, has supported 3,500 young people into education and employment opportunities within the sector. It’s also included the leveraging of the Government’s procurement programme—thank you, Minister Nash—to ensure the Government agencies continue [Audio missing] development and training when evaluating tenders. These are just a few of the initiatives we have put in place to progress the action plan and to deliver—

💬 Hon Member: Can I mute that?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: —a more resilient construction sector.

💬 Arena Williams: Supplementary.

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! No, no, the member doesn’t have the call. I’m going to make two points now. One is that members have been briefed, as part of their training, that there is sometimes a delay in getting to a member remotely. I’m not going to put up with criticism of the staff who are involved in that when there is such a delay, and/or comments, as we did have. The second point I’ll make is that patsy questions and answers have a limit, and the last answer went beyond that limit. And therefore, I’m now going to call Hon Gerry Brownlee for the next question.

💬 Chris Bishop: Point of order.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, is the member going to disagree with the ruling I’ve just made? Because I’m prepared to reverse it.

💬 Chris Bishop: No, I just wanted to say, Mr Speaker, that certainly no one from the Opposition benches was having a go at the staff running the system at all. I want to make that very clear; they’re doing a great job.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, both the member and the member sitting next to him made loud noises during the delay to the supplementary question.

Question No. 11—Foreign Affairs

11. to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: What additional options, if any, has the Government considered in responding to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and why hasn’t the Government introduced an autonomous sanctions regime?

[Audio missing]—both condemn the invasion and immediately implement a number of measures in response to Russia’s actions. These are targeted travel bans against the Russian Government officials and other individuals associated with the invasion of Iraq, the prohibition of the export of all goods to Russian military and security forces, and the suspension of bilateral foreign ministry consultations until further notice. This invasion is a blatant break of the most important international laws and the rules-based world order that we rely upon. We will continue to consider other measures including those to target Russian finances. Again, as has been earlier said, Cabinet has sought advice on a specific Russian sanctions bill, which we expect to discuss with other parties across the House shortly. In terms of wider autonomous sanctions legislation, that would have implications that go far beyond Russia and impact our foreign policy position more broadly and would require further consideration.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: I thank the Minister for that answer, but in relation to the last part: was he in fact incorrect when they said of the autonomous sanctions bill that it’s necessary because there is “a growing risk of New Zealand being perceived as an easy target because of gaps in the range of sanction measures [available] to be imposed” and “for those reasons New Zealand is increasingly regarded as being out of step with security partners such as Australia, Canada, the European Union, and the United States.”?

The Minister of Foreign Affairs has been clear that we don’t rule out a future role for a broader autonomous sanctions regime, but we would note the matter is perhaps not quite as simple as the member would present it now. I would note that I’m advised that National—the prior National-ACT Government—looked at the issue in 2012, chose not to progress it even after the Russian invasion of Crimea in 2014, and the member himself did not even give the bill a first reading when he was Minister of Foreign Affairs.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Can the Minister explain to the House how a Russia-specific sanctions bill, which the Prime Minister has spoken of today, would be so substantially different from the autonomous sanctions bill that we need to wait quite a long time to see it in the House?

I can give a couple of instances. I’m advised that the member’s version of autonomous sanctions legislation has insufficient consideration of human rights issues and the rising issue of cyber-security. Those are two of the issues that we would expect a broader autonomous sanctions bill should encompass.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: If, as Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) has identified—and I quote—“all New Zealand’s key security partners have the ability to impose sanctions outside the UN framework.”, why has her Government still not implemented the ability for New Zealand to do the same, and why are we getting so many excuses about why we cannot participate with other nations in the world to show the strongest condemnation of Russia’s aggressive actions in Ukraine?

As the Prime Minister has outlined, we have and we will continue to take appropriate action against the Russian regime. The wider considerations of a broader autonomous sanctions bill are complex, as the Minister found when he was Minister of Foreign Affairs and his predecessors found when they, for nine years, didn’t introduce one even after the Russian invasion of Crimea.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Has MFAT recommended to the Government that an autonomous sanctions bill is necessary for New Zealand to be in step with the partner nations that we so like to identify ourselves with?

The latest advice on that very issue was received yesterday and the recommendation from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade was that we first consider a specific bill in respect of the Russian invasion of the Ukraine.

💬 SPEAKER: Question—

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Mr Speaker?

💬 SPEAKER: No. The member’s an optimist.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Well it’s been such a long time! I thought—

💬 SPEAKER: Seeing the member, except for myself, is the father of the House, I will give him another supplementary.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Thank you. Thank you very much. I’ll try and make it brief. Can the Minister tell us how long we may have to wait to see this Russia-specific sanctions bill introduced to the House?

I haven’t got a specific time frame to give the member, but the issue is being consider with priority by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. I would note that we’ve already tightened the overseas investment rules into New Zealand, and that many of the new investments that the member might be concerned about would be covered by those tightened rules that this Government introduced.

Question No. 12—Trade and Export Growth

12. to the Minister for Trade and Export Growth: What recent announcement has the Government made about signing a free-trade agreement with the United Kingdom?

on behalf of the Minister—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! No. The member is not answering on behalf; he is the Minister for the moment.

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I am the Acting Minister of Foreign Affairs not the Acting Minister for Trade and Export Growth. I’m answering this on behalf of the Minister.

💬 SPEAKER: I apologise to the member. I’m quite wrong again.

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: No problem, sir. On behalf of the Minister for Trade and Export Growth, I’m pleased to announce that overnight the Hon Damien O’Connor signed the New Zealand - United Kingdom Free Trade Agreement in London. This premium gold standard agreement secures New Zealand’s preferential access to the UK market for the first time since 1973. That is important. It’s the fifth largest economy in the world and, as the Prime Minister has already said, the deal eliminates tariffs on 99.5 percent of our current trade from the time of entry into force. It will accelerate New Zealand’s COVID recovery by boosting New Zealand’s GDP by between $700 million and $1 billion per annum, and exporters will save approximately $37 million per annum from tariff elimination from day one. Of course, they’ll also benefit from the increased trade, which will flow from the increased access. This free-trade agreement sits alongside the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, PACER Plus, the China free-trade agreement (FTA) upgrade—all agreements concluded by this Government to help revitalise our trade agenda, and I believe I would be speaking on behalf of many members of the House in congratulating the Minister, the Hon Damien O’Connor.

💬 Jo Luxton: What Trade For All elements have been included in this FTA?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: The agreement reflects many aspects of the Trade For All Agenda. It includes commitments on the Treaty of Waitangi, small and medium sized enterprises, trade and gender, trade and development, and consumer protection. It’s our first bilateral trade agreement to include a specific article on climate change. It includes important provisions that were hard won in the negotiation on eliminating harmful subsidies such as fossil fuel, and fisheries subsidies. We’re pleased that this agreement advances not just economic gains but also wider Government priorities.

Rino Tirikatene (remote): What are the benefits that are anticipated for Māori in this free-trade agreement?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: Recognising the long and important relationship of the British Crown with Māori through the Treaty of Waitangi, this agreement contains the broadest set of outcomes for Māori that New Zealand has managed to negotiate in any FTA. Included in the FTA is a Māori trade and economic cooperation chapter, recognising the value of increased Māori participation in international trade and investment, and promoting cooperation between the parties to the FTA to enable and advance Māori economic and wellbeing aspiration. It also prioritises tariff elimination on a range of products of interest to Māori, particularly in fisheries, horticulture, dairy, and meat sectors.

Question No. 11 to Minister

Point of order, Mr Speaker. In asking a question to the Hon David Parker, I was unaware that he was the Acting Minister. It does make a difference, as you know. I therefore used an incorrect pronoun in addressing him, and I’ll make sure that’s correct in the Hansard record.

💬 SPEAKER: I’m certain he will be thankful for that, but I think the member will probably have to consult the Clerk before he makes a change of that sort. Hansard is a record of what he says probably more than what he should have said, but the member will consult with the Clerk on that.

Point of order, Mr Speaker. I would hope that the Clerk is able to assist me, because otherwise it’s a terrible change for the Hon David Parker.