Oral Questions

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

The Crown Accounts, released this morning, continue to reflect the strong position New Zealand finds itself in as we meet the current global economic challenges. For the eight months to the end of February, the Operating Balance before Gains and Losses—the OBEGAL deficit—was $8.3 billion, $4.4 billion below that forecast in December’s Half-year Economic and Fiscal Update. Net core Crown debts stood at 35.2 percent of GDP, $1.9 billion less than had been expected and significantly below the countries with which we compare ourselves. Our strong position gives us the ability to provide meaningful support to low and middle income earners at this time, invest in meeting the long-term opportunities and challenges facing the New Zealand economy, while keeping a careful eye on our overall long-term fiscal position.

💬 Dr Duncan Webb: What do the Crown Accounts indicate about the economic prospects for 2022?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The Crown Accounts results reflect the strength of the economy and that we have come through COVID not only with one of the best health responses in the world, but one of the strongest economic outcomes globally. We do need to acknowledge, however, that 2022 will be a challenging year for many households and businesses, and we will need to take a cautious approach to support them through this. We are in a strong position to do this. But, as the International Monetary Fund said last week when they congratulated New Zealand for our strong fiscal and economic position, they also warned against tax cuts at this time while the economy is rebuilding.

💬 Dr Duncan Webb: What other reports has he seen on the New Zealand economy?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The resilience of the jobs market is continuing to support the economy. Last week, Stats New Zealand did report that filled jobs in February had edged down by 0.3 percent, compared with January, but still remaining at record highs of 2.29 million people in work. The SEEK New Zealand Employment Report released today shows a number of job advertisements in March rose 2 percent compared with February, to a record high. On an annual basis, growth was 27 percent. And TradeMe reported today that there was a record 81,984 vacancies listed on its site in the March quarter. They also indicated that wages were rising with the average salary for advertised roles—up 4 percent to $65,799. The strong jobs market shows that the Government’s actions in response to COVID-19 since the start of the pandemic have proven to be the best economic approach. The opening of borders to foreign workers and tourists will also accelerate this recovery.

Question No. 2—Prime Minister

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

Yes, including the package that came in on 1 April and will see 1.4 million New Zealanders’ incomes boosted as we confront cost of living challenges. This is in addition to the moves we made last month to reduce fuel excise by 25c a litre for three months, with road-user charge changes coming before the House this week also. We know there is no easy fix to the challenges presented by the COVID recovery supply constraints and the war in Ukraine, but the Government is doing what we can to support Kiwis through.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Does she agree that whenever her Government decides to spend more of taxpayers’ hard-earned money, they have a responsibility to actually deliver better outcomes?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Of course we have a responsibility to do our very best as a Government through trying times to ensure that we are lifting the outcomes, be it across wellbeing outcomes, be it across economic outcomes. This has been our focus the entire time we’ve been in office.

💬 Christopher Luxon: How has the Government managed to spend $1.9 billion more on mental health but after three years has delivered “no change in access to acute and specialist mental health services”, and is this an acceptable outcome for spending that much taxpayer money?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: If I track back to the direct ask that was made of Government when we came into office, where there was a crisis across the board on mental health, the very specific focus that came from those who had experience of the system and those who worked in the system was the complete absence of primary mental health care. That was adding to extra pressure on acute needs. That is why we have built a primary mental health system for the first time in New Zealand’s history. It is providing tens of thousands of appointments for New Zealanders who previously had no access to early mental health support. At the same time, we know we need to continue to build the tertiary and acute care. It’s a particular focus of ours on building the workforce, which in some cases takes up to five years to create.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Can she explain how the funds she announced for mental health services for tertiary students have spent $4 million but only delivered 304 counselling sessions, and is $13,000 per session an acceptable outcome for spending taxpayers’ money?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Calculating based on the entirety of a programme of care across providers by those early counselling sessions that have been provided is exactly the reason that that member’s party in office did nothing to support tertiary students, to support young people, to create primary mental health care. If that is the way we calculate care in this community for mental health needs, that explains why there was no investment before us. We have provided Piki Ora in conjunction with the Green Party and Mana Ake across primary and intermediate schools across Christchurch, across Kaikōura, and now into the West Coast, Counties Manukau, and Northland. We’ve provided primary mental health care for New Zealanders across the country. We are now providing rainbow communities with the mental health care that they need through specialist providers, and now we are also providing youth care through increased support through youth helplines and through tertiary education. These services didn’t exist before.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Why, despite spending an extra $30,000 per prisoner compared to 2018, has there been a steep reduction in the number of prisoners accessing rehabilitation services, and is this an acceptable outcome for spending more taxpayer money?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Again, very crude analysis here. If you divide the cost of spending and there are fewer prisoners, then the cost per prisoner goes up. If the member wants to achieve economies of scale in corrections by having more people in prison, that explains why that Government when they were in office started building a mega prison. When we came into office we said that is not the kind of style of corrections service New Zealanders want. There will not be American-style mega prisons on our watch. We will also not invest in rehabilitation programmes that are sometimes eight hours long and call it a success. We’ve invested in programmes that work and that reduce reoffending and—proof is in the pudding—reduce the number of people in prison.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Does she agree that a 40 percent increase in spending on police that has failed to prevent a more than 40 percent increase in gang membership, or a 21 percent increase in violent crime, is not an acceptable outcome for spending that much more taxpayer money?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The member now seems to be telling his own party that he doesn’t support an increase in police, because that is what we’ve done. We have increased the number of front-line officers, and that means we now have more police officers on the beat than we’ve ever had before. We now have 700 police officers working solely in the organised crime unit—more than we have ever had before. And if the member on that side doesn’t support that growth in police numbers, that’s for him to answer for.

💬 Christopher Luxon: How can taxpayers have any confidence that the record $6 billion of their money she is planning to announce in new spending at the Budget will return any sort of value, given her Government’s 4.5-year record of spending more but delivering worse outcomes?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: A 3.2 percent unemployment rate in the middle of a one-in-100-year economic crisis; some of the lowest debt relative to other countries in the OECD that you will have seen—we have supported New Zealanders through a health and economic crisis that, yes, meant we had to invest, but kept people in work. At the same time, we have overseen a lift in incomes for our lowest-income New Zealanders and a once-in-a-generation increase in welfare. We have nine of the child poverty indicators tracking down—60,000 fewer children in poverty than when that member had his party in Government. I could speak at great length about what we have done in office to repair the damage of that time in office by the National Party, so if the member wants to ask more patsies, I would welcome it.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Ha, ha—classic! Why, at a time where the cost of living is soaring, and Kiwi households are making tough decisions about their own spending priorities, does her Government refuse to do the same thing when it comes to spending taxpayers’ hard-earned money?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: We do that every single day. The member’s proposal, for instance, is demonstrating where his priorities are; that when it comes to taxpayer’s money he would rather, for instance, spend a billion dollars giving those on $180,000 or more—and those who own investment properties—a tax break, than put it in health or education. That’s his priority.

Question No. 3—Health

3. to the Minister of Health: How is the Government preparing for the forthcoming flu season?

On 1 April, we began our annual influenza vaccination season, and I’m pleased to report to the House that, on that day alone, 24,729 people got their flu jab. This year, the Government is ramping up the flu vaccination campaign, with 40 percent more free flu shots available this year as part of the COVID-19 winter plan. This means that, while New Zealand usually uses about 1.4 million flu doses a year, this year the Government is making 2 million doses available while widening eligibility for people to get vaccinated for free. In an ordinary year, flu kills more than 500 New Zealanders, but this is no ordinary year because, for the past two years with the country closed to the rest of the world because of the pandemic, we’ve been largely free of colds and flu, and so this year we must be prepared for a much higher incidence of them.

💬 Dr Tracey McLellan: Who will be included in the expanded eligibility for flu vaccines?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: We routinely make the flu shot available for free for everyone over the age of 65 and for those who are pregnant or at risk of becoming seriously ill because of other underlying conditions. This winter, on clinical advice, we’ve widened eligibility to include Māori and Pacific people aged 55 and over, because of the high epidemiological risk they face, and this means an extra 39,000 people can have the vaccine for free. It’s also important to remember that, like the COVID-19 vaccine, vaccination against the flu provides indirect protection to those around us as a result of the increase in community immunity. This enables our whānau, our workplaces, and our health system all to gain benefits from a wider net of protection.

💬 Dr Tracey McLellan: How is the Government encouraging uptake this year?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: Every year, about half the people eligible for free vaccination take it up. But, because of the heightened risk this year, we will be running a public health campaign to remind people to boost their immunity by getting the vaccination. We’re also looking at ways to increase the vaccination workforce to get flu shots to those who need them. Ordinarily, GPs, pharmacists, and community health providers administer the vaccination. However, for COVID, we substantially expanded our vaccinator workforce, and we are now working to introduce a new vaccinating health-worker role to be able to deliver flu vaccines as well. This fits with our Government’s approach of building back better when it comes to our health system.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: Why did he let $3.8 million of flu vaccines expire last year, and will this year’s flu vaccine programme add more millions to his botched management of the immunisation schedule?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: That member’s reliability with figures, as we know, is not good, so I’m not going to comment on the figures that he uses except to say that this Government’s track record in protecting New Zealanders against known health risks is actually a darned good one. That’s why we had the COVID vaccination campaign. That’s why we’ve been preparing for some months for this flu season, and we are well prepared for it.

Question No. 4—Prime Minister

My question is to the Prime Minister and reads as follows: does she stand by all of her Government’s statements and actions?

Order! I think the member might want to try reading it again.

4. to the Prime Minister: Apologies, Mr Speaker. My question actually reads: does she stand by all of her Government’s statements and policies?

Still yes, in particular our ongoing response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. As I said yesterday, the reports of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by Russia are beyond reprehensible. Russia must answer to the world for what they’ve done. New Zealand, alongside other Rome Statute States Parties, has already referred the situation to the International Criminal Court, and we continue to support prosecutors in their investigations into all international crimes committed in Ukraine. As a Government, we’re continuing our response against Russia and, last night, issued further sanctions. This was the second run of sanctions since the passing of the Russia Sanctions Act just three weeks ago, and builds on the sense of sanctions we’ve implemented to date, our visa supports, and the humanitarian aid we have provided Ukraine. All New Zealanders have been shaken by what we’ve seen in Ukraine, and as a Government we’re continuing to condemn the actions of Russia and support Ukraine.

💬 David Seymour: Does she accept that the global security situation is changing rapidly and, if so, will she commit to a pathway where New Zealand spends 2 percent of GDP on defence, as Australia has?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Yes, in answer to the first question, I do absolutely accept that the dynamic has changed considerably. These events only demonstrate the changing strategic environment that New Zealand is operating in. I would say that our response, both at a bilateral level to this conflict, but also the spending decisions that we’ve made on our defence estate—including, for instance, the purchase of P-8s, additional assets for the navy, and so on—demonstrates our ongoing focus on ensuring that we have the capability and the kit that’s required to respond within the Pacific to the changing threats that we face.

💬 David Seymour: So will her Government commit to a pathway towards spending 2 percent of GDP on defence or not?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: As I’ve said, we’ve committed to ensuring that our Defence Force have the capability that they need to ensure that we are a responsible and responsive player within our region, and we demonstrate that time and time again—whether it’s a response in the Middle East, the fact that we even have people on the ground supporting the response in Europe to what’s occurring now, or our purchases that we’ve made. I’m not going to pre-commit to spending decisions for the Budget at this point in time, but I would ask the Minister to demonstrate where we have not pulled our weight in this international environment.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Would it be possible to increase defence spending, cut taxes, and not cut public services, all at the same time?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: This does appear to be the proposal from some members in this House, and I think it would be an interesting environment to see, for instance, the member opposite propose that we cut some of the very most basic safety net that we have in the country, while dramatically increasing defence spending. But that is the member’s prerogative.

💬 David Seymour: Does she accept that tax revenue is up $17 billion per annum in the last two years alone and, if so, does she stand by her statement that this is not the time to cut taxes?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I stand by this Government’s response, which is to put additional support in to make sure that those who are feeling the effects of the cost of living are well supported, as much as we can. So, the changes to, for instance, fuel excise comes at the cost of $350 million; the $270 million that we put into making sure that the family tax credit is increased; and, of course, the additional spending going into lifting superannuitants’ incomes, and acknowledging that our students and others on low incomes are doing it tough—1.4 million New Zealanders have benefited from those boosts. We know it doesn’t solve everything, but that’s what we are able to do at this point in time. I would also acknowledge, though, what we’re seeing in the Crown accounts is, yes, that we still are facing deficits, but we have also seen, of course, a change in what we’ve previously forecasted, as a result of more people being in employment.

💬 David Seymour: What does the Prime Minister say to the dozens of people who have commented on her Facebook page on Friday to say there was nothing in those 1 April changes for middle-class working New Zealanders who aren’t receiving benefits, such as Amy McKenzie, who said “What about all the Kiwis paying taxes for this ‘extra support’? How does this help us help our own families while we’re working hard to try and keep up with the rising costs of living also?”

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Well, the first thing I’d say is that 60 percent of families actually are impacted by the changes that are made to the family tax credit. So that is a large number of New Zealanders as a result of the changes made through Working for Families, which, of course, does go to working families. The second point I’d make is that the response to fuel excise was one way that we can very quickly see a change that, depending on fuel costs—anything from $11 to $17 a week, potentially, for everyone. That was a way that we could quickly respond also. But what I would also say is one of the most important things we can do is make sure incomes—not just, of course, what can be done through tax bracket changes, which often deliver the least to those who need it the most. Rising incomes is what makes a significant difference, and up until now we have seen under this Government incomes outstrip the cost of living, and it is projected to be the case again soon.

💬 David Seymour: Does the Prime Minister accept that with tax revenue having risen $17 billion per annum in just two years, one of the easiest things she could do to help New Zealanders with their after-tax income is let them keep more of their own money by cutting income taxes?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The member speaks as if we have done nothing, of course, to change, for instance, tax credit regimes that make a significant difference to those on low and middle income families. The member well knows that tax bracket changes—for instance, such as those proposed by the Leader of the Opposition—for those on the lowest incomes delivers something like $2 a week. If you use the more sophisticated system that we’re able to operate in New Zealand on account of our size—use the family tax credit system, for instance—you can deliver a much greater benefit to those family members than just changing tax brackets. That is what we did from the moment we came in, in addition to things like the winter energy payment.

💬 David Seymour: Can the Prime Minister explain to the New Zealand public how the Government’s policy of fair pay agreements (FPAs) will increase worker productivity, and, if so, why does she think the OECD says the policy would “cut both labour and multi-factor productivity growth in the covered sectors.”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Of course, those countries that are often held up as examples of demonstrating better rates of productivity than New Zealand include the likes of Germany and Australia, who operate fair pay agreements. Look, there are often, from time to time, policies where the member and I are just going to fundamentally disagree. On this side of the House, our view is that if we want New Zealanders to be better off, we do that by ensuring, for instance, that they have decent wages and decent conditions, and that is exactly what fair pay agreements are all about now. Now, not every, for instance, employer and every workforce will necessarily see an increase in their wage bills as a result of an FPA. What it’s designed to do is lift those who are operating at the very bottom and who are sometimes driving the sector down to come up to an agreed standard, and some employers support the role that FPAs can provide in that regard.

💬 David Seymour: Can she tell New Zealanders how many fewer COVID cases we will have due to her decision to keep the country at red yesterday, and, if so, how does she justify the acute costs of that decision to hospitality operators?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The changes that we made yesterday were all about ensuring that our hospital system and our healthcare system are able to cope with the number of people that are currently in there as a result of COVID. So that’s not directly aligned to cases, but it can be. Roughly half of our hospitalisations at the moment are in the Auckland region. So whilst cases are coming down, even based on the modelling that we have, we’re still tracking above the peak of what would have been a medium transmission scenario for hospitalisations. We don’t take those decisions lightly. We know they have an impact. But, on the flip side, hospitality will equally be hit if people don’t come out because they don’t have the confidence to be out because case rates are too high and the health system isn’t working. That is the balance that we have to strike.

Question No. 5—Transport

5. to the Minister of Transport: What recent updates has he received on the repair work to the Tairāwhiti State highway network following recent weather events in the region?

On Saturday, I visited Tai Rāwhiti with my colleague the Hon Meka Whaitiri to see firsthand the progress made in cleaning up after devastating flooding last week in the region. We recognise how much the people who live in our regional and remote Tai Rāwhiti communities rely on the access that State Highway 35 provides for essential supplies and services. It was, therefore, a real privilege to be able to attend the blessing for the Mangahauini Bridge at Tokomaru Bay as it opened for traffic days ahead of schedule. I’d like to say a special thanks to the main contractor, Downer’s, and the amazing local contractors, Blackbee Contractors, who have been working day and night in trying conditions to help get these communities moving again.

Tāmati Coffey: How have the community chipped in to assist the clean-up efforts?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: There were nearly 120 people involved in the repair and clean-up work on Tai Rāwhiti’s State highways, ranging from traffic management and arborists to those operating excavators, graders, and diggers, from inside and outside the Tai Rāwhiti region, and much of that work goes on. In particular, crews have worked tirelessly to install well in excess of 4,000 tonnes of rock to form the base for the new Mangahauini Bridge support and allow for the bridge approach to be reinstated. This is a real testament to the value of local procurement and the importance of the community places on essential transport links. I can also shout out to the aunties who put on an awesome feed at the Tokomaru Bay hall and the excellent pāua pies that were provided to everyone.

Tāmati Coffey: What are the next steps for Tai Rāwhiti’s response to the storm?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: Contractors will continue work to futureproof the bridge, which will be sealed this Thursday. Works will continue around the edges of the bridge and in the river to futureproof it. State Highway 35 does for the time being remain closed north of Tokomaru Bay through to Te Puia Springs. This section has seen significant damage to the road, which I reviewed, including major cracks and uneven surfaces, slumping, and two major drop-outs. Access is expected to be restored later this week, with restrictions such as daytime opening only and a number of traffic management controls along the route. Once remedial works are done and the winter season has completed, we’ll also be proceeding with long-awaited Provincial Growth Fund - funded works to improve the resilience and safety of State Highway 35.

Question No. 6—Finance

6. to the Minister of Finance: Is he concerned by the findings of the latest ANZ consumer confidence survey, which shows consumers are significantly less confident than in Australia and a record number of people are expecting to be worse off this time next year?

The findings of the latest ANZ consumer confidence survey reflect the uncertain and challenging environment that New Zealanders are facing in 2022. Like all New Zealanders, I am concerned about the impact of nearly 2½ years of the global COVID-19 pandemic, resulting supply chain blockages, and Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine. We are, however, in a strong position to be able to support New Zealand businesses and households through this time, just as we protected them through COVID-19. It’s why we boosted the incomes of low and middle income families from 1 April instead of giving thousands of dollars to the wealthiest New Zealanders. It’s why we cut the fuel excise by 25c to help New Zealanders facing pain at the petrol pump. When we see strong Crown accounts and small to medium sized enterprise (SME) surveys like the Xero Small Business Index, which today showed small business growth over the start of the year, with wage growth and job growth, and stronger SME activity than in Australia or the UK, it indicates that as a country we can deal with the uncertainty and support New Zealanders to get through the Omicron peak and this global inflation spike.

💬 Nicola Willis: Why does he keep blaming international events for New Zealand’s economic situation when Australia, affected by the very same events, is experiencing lower inflation than New Zealand, higher consumer confidence, and higher growth forecasts?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Right around the world, countries are experiencing the impact of the global COVID-19 pandemic. We are at different stages of that pandemic. The survey the member refers to in her primary question comes at a time when New Zealanders are experiencing the worst of COVID-19. Through the actions of the Government and the hard work of New Zealanders, up to this point we have been able to withstand that and we will continue to do so. I would bear in mind that organisations such as the IMF have as recently as last week congratulated New Zealand not just on our health response but also our economic response as well.

💬 Nicola Willis: Is he concerned that New Zealanders’ consumer confidence is now lower than even during the depths of the global financial crisis, and will he acknowledge that a growing number of households feel they are going backwards on his Government’s watch?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As I said in my answer to the primary question, this is an extremely challenging time for many New Zealand businesses and households. We supported those businesses and households to get through COVID-19, and we are continuing to do so. On this side of the House, we know the importance of investing long term in things like transport and in housing, and making sure we have a good health and education system is required alongside making sure we provide those individual supports.

💬 Nicola Willis: What does he say to Katie, who responded to the Prime Minister’s Facebook post about the Government’s 1 April changes to benefits and entitlements, saying, “What about the middle income earners. We both have full-time jobs. There is no relief because we aren’t on benefits, but still get stung by the increases everywhere.”?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I express sympathy for that person, but, then, I would refer that person to meet up with Becks, who wrote to the Prime Minister to say, “Thanks so much for all you and your Government has done. The COVID assistance has kept me in business without a doubt, and I’ve been around long enough to appreciate that National would’ve turned a blind eye to the likes of my little business.”

💬 Nicola Willis: Is he concerned about the economic situation confronting Sarah, who also responded—[Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Order! The member can have two extra supplementaries for that outburst.

💬 Nicola Willis: Thank you. Is he concerned about the economic situation confronting Sarah, who also responded to the Prime Minister’s Facebook post, saying, “What about the middle classes who earn slightly too much to get in-work tax credits yet not enough to keep up with the ever increasing cost of living.”?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: What I would say to that person and to all New Zealanders is that we appreciate the challenges that are in front of them, and that’s the reason why packages like the 1 April package came through. It’s the reason why we supported New Zealanders with $23 billion worth of financial support through the COVID-19 pandemic. But I would also invite that person to perhaps be able to talk to Martina, who wrote to the Prime Minister to say, “I personally wanted to say thank you for always having the heart of New Zealand in the support you and your Government give us. Watching you and the team yesterday”—this is last week—“as you gave details of the petrol reductions was uplifting. This is a Government that has tried to act quickly and alleviate the pressure and stresses for families and businesses across the country. Your heart shines through the key messages you give. I’m not simply saying thank you for yesterday but—”

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

💬 Nicola Willis: Why won’t he improve New Zealanders’ financial prospects by delivering them income tax relief when the Crown accounts today show that thanks in part to inflation, the Government is raking in more income tax than forecast, up $12.5 billion since Labour came to office?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: What I would note that those accounts show is that revenue is coming in to the Government as a result of the fact that companies are making bigger profits, and more people are in work and they’re earning more. On this side of the House, we don’t think giving tax cuts to people who earn more than $180,000 is the right response in the environment we have, and neither does the IMF, so I think, for that member’s benefit, on this side of the House we will continue to support New Zealanders, we will continue to target where we put it, and we will be careful with the Government’s books.

💬 Nicola Willis: Does he consider that record low consumer confidence indicates, as ANZ states, “a broad consensus that it’s time to close the wallet”, and why is it that the Minister is planning a record $6 billion operating allowance in the upcoming Budget but will not prioritise tax relief for struggling New Zealanders?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: It’s a surprising question from the member given that she appears to be joining me in the view that we need a $6 billion operating allowance, because she actually told the New Zealand Herald today that she’s going to spend the same amount of money as this Government is, except that she’s going to prioritise untargeted tax cuts for the most wealthy New Zealanders.

💬 Nicola Willis: Is he concerned that the vast majority of New Zealanders think that right now is a “terrible time” to buy a major household item, and does he not accept that this is an ominous sign for the future?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I think many New Zealanders will be experiencing the impacts of global supply chain disruption, which would particularly affect the purchase of those sorts of items. What I think New Zealanders also understand is the importance of taking a long-term view where we do invest in health, we do invest in education, we do invest in housing, we do invest in transport and balance that with keeping an eye on the books and looking after the people who need it the most, not giving tax cuts to people who earn more than $180,000 a year.

Question No. 7—Conservation

7. to the Minister of Conservation: Has the Department of Conservation identified how many kororā/little blue penguin live in the rock wall at Pūtiki Bay; if so, how many?

The Department of Conservation (DOC) has advised me that there are currently no burrows with any sign of kororā in the rock wall at Pūtiki Bay. I’m advised by the department that surveys undertaken in 2021 identified four burrows along the rock wall that did have signs of kororā, but that none of these are being actively used by kororā at present. However, I do want to thank the member for raising this issue, as the situation at Pūtiki Bay has highlighted some of the issues that are very live and playing out, that occur when decisions are made under the Wildlife Act 1953, which is why I’ve decided to announce a first principles review of the Act back in December.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Is the Minister confident that no kororā will come to harm as a result of the permit DOC has granted developers to move kororā while removing the rock wall; if so, why?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: Yeah, thank you to that member. These questions, of course, are really relevant because I know that many people have been very concerned about the wellbeing and welfare of the kororā. As the member will be aware, the decision to grant the permit was that of the Auckland Council, which has been granted to the development agency. The decision to grant the permit under the Wildlife Act, though, provided the authority to capture, handle, and relocate kororā as a consequence of the position that they found themselves—the options that were put to them under the Wildlife Act: either (a) decline the consent, and, therefore, you are at the behest of those works going ahead, and you can’t really do anything other than let the works go ahead and they can’t ensure the protection of the kororā; or grant the consent. By granting the consent and enabling those kororā to be moved, the Department of Conservation made the determination based on the advice provided to them that this would be the way to ensure the safety of those kororā. But the question remains that we are still at this really—it’s an unsatisfactory decision-making process that the Wildlife Act confers upon decision makers.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does the Minister agree with Karen Saunders of Waiheke’s Native Bird Rescue that it is “beyond horrific in this day and age to be destroying habitat for the sake of pleasure boats that are contributing to the climate emergency.”; if she does, why did the department grant the permit?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: As the member will be aware, the consents for the overarching marina development, those are granted by the Auckland Council, and I, as the Minister of Conservation, don’t have any discretion with that respect. So the issue that was before me as a decision maker is very, very narrow around what we can do in terms of moving and relocating the kororā now that the permit for the development has been agreed to. So with respect to the broader comments of the member, look, I understand that there are many views about the impacts of the marina development but I don’t have any ministerial responsibility for the broader implications.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Did the decision under the Wildlife Act to grant the permit take into account—quoting penguin expert Dr John Cockrem of Massey University—that “The expectation is that the birds will come back to their home and if their home is gone, they will go into the rocks closest to where they have been, but their home will be destroyed.”; if not, why not?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: The Department of Conversation, I’m advised, engaged with Dr Cockrem, as well as a number of other ecologists who presented different views. My understanding is that the advice was that the safest option was to grant the consent to enable the relocation. Further, the ecologists that they turned to said that the penguins, or the kororā, would most likely return back to the environment, albeit in its altered state. So that was the information that they have relied on to grant the consent.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does the Minister think that it is acceptable that commercial developments are prioritised ahead of the protection of threatened species such as kororā; if so, will her reform of the Wildlife Act rectify this issue and put native species first?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: As I think I’ve addressed, I think that there are multiple issues here at play. I think some of these issues will be for consideration under the broader Resource Management Act reforms. I think some of them fall within the very narrow scope of what can be done to protect wildlife under the Wildlife Act, which, as the Waitangi Tribunal found, is completely out of date, which, as many conservationists have found, is completely out of date, which, as we understand, just is not appropriate and fit for purpose in our current day and age. I expect that we will hear many submissions around the way that we can best ensure that the Wildlife Act is fit for purpose. Moving forward, that takes into consideration all of the impacts of development, which are currently creating adverse outcomes as a consequence of a lack of discretion for decision makers to be able to make.

Question No. 8—Conservation

8. to the Minister of Conservation: What recent announcements has she made regarding Jobs for Nature funding for the restoration of the Whanganui River?

Last month, I announced that $7.8 million in Jobs for Nature funding would be provided to Te Awa Tupua o Whanganui, a project led by Ngā Tāngata Tiaki. The project will employ at least 66 people over four years, and work will focus on mitigating soil erosion, improving freshwater quality, and enhancing the biodiversity values of the river. It is incredibly valuable work not only for the impact it will have on the everyday lives of the people that are undertaking that work, but for the enduring impact it will have on the river and its communities.

💬 Angela Roberts: What will this investment mean for the health of the river?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: The project will deliver a range of conservation outcomes, including 290 kilometres of riparian fencing, the planting of more than 600,000 native trees to protect the health of the river, and possible development of wetlands. There will also be freshwater fish habitat restoration, pest and weed control, as well as the establishment of multiple native nurseries to develop the plants and seedlings for the ongoing project.

💬 Angela Roberts: What co-governance arrangements have been put in place for the river, and how does this project interact with them?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: Well, it’s a good question. In 2017, the National Government recognised the Whanganui River, in law, as a “living and indivisible whole” Te Awa Tupua through the Te Awa Tupua (Whanganui River Claims Settlement) Act. The Act established co-governance arrangements including Te Pou Tupua, the human face that represents the river comprising Crown and iwi nominees; and Te Kōpuka, a permanent joint committee under the Local Government Act acting as a strategy group for the river, with delegated planning powers comprised of members including iwi appointees. The Department of Conservation is supporting Te Kōpuka to develop Te Heke Ngahuru, the strategy for Te Awa Tupua, and the Mouri Tūroa project, which will support this kaupapa through the focus of the restoration of the awa and the reclamation of tikanga.

Question No. 9—Workplace Relations and Safety

9. to the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety: Does he agree that flexible labour markets are one of the foundations of New Zealand’s economic progress in the past three decades?

Well-balanced flexibility in the labour market can support economic and social progress. For example, the flexibility provided to employees to manage their health through 10 days of sick leave has provided many benefits. I note that the member and his party voted against that. While New Zealand’s economy has made good progress in a number of respects, including 3.2 percent unemployment under this Government, there are also real weaknesses in our labour market that hold us back. A longstanding mismatch between wage growth and productivity is not economic progress. Suppressed wages and inflexible working conditions is not economic progress. Working two or three jobs just to put food on the table at night is not economic progress. On this side of the House, economic progress is a high wage, high productivity economy that delivers for workers and businesses alike. That’s what we’re committed to delivering, and on that note we very much look forward to the first reading of the Fair Pay Agreements Bill very shortly.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Sorry, does he believe in flexible labour markets or not?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: As I just described, we do believe that well-balanced labour markets that have appropriate flexibility for employers and employees are important. What I do note is the very strong international evidence that labour markets that have a mix of individual bargaining, collective bargaining, and sector-based bargaining are the labour markets that function the most effectively, the most equitably, and which have the highest rates of labour productivity.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does he agree with the proposition that the fair pay agreements regime he is introducing today is less about fair pay and more about imposing mandatory union deals on Kiwi workplaces?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: No, I don’t accept that characterisation at all. I do accept the characterisation that I’ve heard from some major employers who point out to me that at the moment, they are held back from offering better terms and conditions for their workers that they would wish to because of the race to the bottom nature of our existing labour market.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does he care about BusinessNZ’s view that “Fair pay agreements couldn’t come at a worse time than now as businesses face mounting pressure from runaway inflation, labour shortages, fast rising costs, supply chain issues and the Omicron response”?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: In response to those comments, I would note two things. The first is that the passage of fair pay agreements will see fair pay agreements not coming into effect until next year at the earliest. The second point that I would note is that there is, in fact, a no more apposite time for us to be considering this issue, given that some of the very people who have helped our country through the global pandemic—the likes of cleaners, who have kept our workplaces, our schools, and our hospitals safe and hygienic; our retail workers, who have kept us stocked with food and other goods—have been the people that have helped us to get through but are very often the people who have been left out in the cold of the labour market conditions that we currently have.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does he still think that the Government can add to the cost structure for small and large businesses with no consequences either for their international competitiveness or the cost of living, and if so, can he please explain how this works?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: As we have canvassed in this House previously on this topic, the member and I have a very different view about these matters. The member seems to think that there is a straight out trade-off between fair and decent pay and conditions for workers on one hand and good economic outcomes on the other hand. On this side of the House, we actually believe in a better and more progressive vision of labour relations, one in which investment in workers, investment in skills and training, and valuing people can actually build value and productivity in the long run. That is why, for example, Australia, which has had a form of sector-based bargaining in place for most of the past 40 years, has a higher rate of labour productivity than New Zealand, with its largely individualised-based bargaining system.

Question No. 10—Diversity, Inclusion and Ethnic Communities

10. to the Minister for Diversity, Inclusion and Ethnic Communities: What recent announcement has she made about supporting former refugees, recent migrants, and ethnic communities into employment?

Along with Minister Sepuloni, we launched the Government’s Employment Action Plan for former refugees, recent migrants, and ethnic communities. Across Government, we’re committing to 22 actions to improve employment outcomes for these groups. The action plan was informed by extensive consultation with these communities, and brings together current and planned programmes of work across Government to provide better support for these groups to develop skills, gain work experience, and move into more sustainable and rewarding work, while also supporting employers to create more inclusive workplaces. It also builds on the ongoing work of the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety, Michael Wood, to end migrant worker exploitation, forced labour, and human trafficking.

💬 Ibrahim Omer: Why is this announcement important?

💬 Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: Our ethnic communities are a vital part of Aotearoa New Zealand’s social fabric and economy, and make up nearly 20 percent of New Zealand’s total population. But despite record-low unemployment, and although there are of course many who make a significant contribution to New Zealand’s economy, there are still too many people from our ethnic communities who continue to face systemic barriers that prevent them from accessing and progressing in the labour market. Many have spoken to me about being highly qualified for the jobs that they’re applying for, but not being hired. Many people report discrimination in both internal and external recruitment processes that also impact career progression, and others face pay disparities. This action plan will help us tackle one of the biggest issues for our ethnic communities, and takes significant steps towards ensuring the skills and experiences of these communities are recognised, respected, and valued.

💬 Ibrahim Omer: How will the plan improve outcomes for these communities?

💬 Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: The action plan is one of seven population-specific Employment Action Plans that support this Government’s wider employment strategy. Not only does it support these communities in preparing them for and connecting them with work, we’re working with employers in industry to increase employment opportunities for people from ethnic communities, and to promote diverse and more inclusive workplaces. I want to acknowledge the fact that there have been various community groups and entities, like Diversity Works and the Auckland Business Chamber, who’ve been working towards better employment outcomes for ethnic communities, and also themselves supporting more inclusive workspaces. I look forward to working alongside them. It is critical that we unlock—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member’s answer is now too long.

Question No. 11—Police

11. to the Minister of Police: Is she concerned by a recent report that shows New Zealand Police kill people at 11 times the rate of police in England and Wales, with the Police’s use of force disproportionately directed at Māori?

I am concerned about the use of firearms in our communities and that is why we are reforming our firearms law. Policing is an inherently dangerous job and front-line staff put themselves in harm’s way every day to protect the public. The use of lethal force by our police is an absolute last resort, and no police officer ever wants to pull the trigger. I am committed to ensuring Police has the tools available to safely defuse situations without the use of lethal force. It’s worth noting that New Zealand has a much higher rate of gun ownership than the UK, and that the UK has already undertaken comprehensive firearms reforms to make their community safer, which we are currently in the process of doing. The statistics are really clear that our Māori and Pacific communities are disproportionately represented, and that is why police are working with Kim Workman on addressing the bias that exists in the police operating environment.

💬 Golriz Ghahraman: Is she concerned by the fact that many of the people killed by police were not in possession of a firearm and had mental health issues which were likely known to police?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: That is not my understanding; it’s my understanding that the vast majority of those who are shot by police are armed.

💬 Golriz Ghahraman: What action, if any, has the Police taken to establish a national programme for monitoring and mentoring of the armed offenders squad (AOS), which was recommended by the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) seven years ago after junior squad officers were deployed without the full qualifications and training required for the AOS?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: I can confirm that the national training programme for the AOS is already in place.

💬 Golriz Ghahraman: Does the Minister think it’s acceptable that Māori are seven times more likely than Pākehā to be on the receiving end of police use of force, including pepper spray, taser, and firearms, and does she think this is reflective of the low training requirements of New Zealand Police, which are behind Germany, Australia, and even the US?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: It is not acceptable. That is why the Police have developed Te Huringa o Te Tai strategy, which has been developed in partnership with iwi Māori to address concerns and to reduce victimisation, offending, and injuries among police. It’s also why it’s important that our police represent the communities that they serve. It’s something that I’m committed to as Minister of Police, and that’s why it’s been the focus of our 1,800 growth initiative with Māori, Pasifika, and Asian recruits making up 37 percent of all new recruits.

💬 Golriz Ghahraman: Is she concerned that the IPCA reports into police shootings indicate a pattern of escalation by the armed offenders squad and that the head of the IPCA said, of the shootings, that police continue to “put themselves in a position where firearms use is the only option”?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: Yes, I am concerned, and that is why I support the police in their efforts to ensure that they review their training and that they put in place the measures that they need to, to make sure that the AOS are sufficiently trained—and just for that member’s information, they do receive a minimum of 20 days’ training each year.

Question No. 12—Police

12. to the Minister of Police: Does she stand by her statement, “I reject the premise that gang tensions have increased under this Government’s watch”; if so, how does she reconcile that statement with the over 40 percent increase in gang membership since 2017?

I stand by the full context of all my answers at question time last Wednesday, including my statement that there is no doubt that violence and gang tensions are a feature of our community and we have to do everything we can to ensure that we deal with that. That’s why we are deploying the largest ever number of organised crime staff by funding 700 additional specialist staff, introducing firearms prohibition orders legislation, and why we’ve rolled out tactical response teams across the country. In answer to the second part of the question, the National Gang List is an intelligence tool used by police, and while the number of gang members on the list has dropped by around 500 since August last year, it remains an unreliable tool for measuring gang membership. As such, we will continue our work to target gangs. We know there is always more to do, and we are working hard to address the issue.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: What is her response to Auckland resident Helen White commenting in the New Zealand Herald on Friday, that—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Now, members got extra questions as a result of similar laughter. Do we want the reverse to be applied here?

💬 Hon Member: No.

💬 SPEAKER: No? Well, just be quiet then. Mark Mitchell, start again.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Thank you, Mr Speaker. What is her response to Auckland resident Helen White, commenting in the New Zealand Herald on Friday, that “Once we had a city full of international students and tourists. Now we are faced with an increase in gang activity in the city”?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: My response to that is that, as a Government, we have to ensure that we have adequate police and that they are resourced well. Can I just confirm for that member that in Auckland alone, due to the fact that we are building a police force up by 1,800, we have increased the number by 360.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Was Helen White wrong to claim gang activity and crime has increased in Auckland?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: What I can confirm, and what Ms White and I both agree on, is the support that this Government has given to police to ensure that we deal with gang activity appropriately by ensuring there are 700 police focused on organised crime.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Point of order, Mr Speaker. The Minister didn’t come anywhere close to actually addressing the question.

💬 SPEAKER: I think she came close enough.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Can the Minister provide her definition of gang tensions?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: What I can confirm is that this Government has supported the police by lifting the numbers by 1,200 so far; we’re well on our way to the 1,800 target. We’ve increased the budget by $450 million, we are ensuring that 700 police are dedicated to organised crime activity, and in Auckland alone—due to the increased numbers—they have 360 more cops on the beat.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Point of order. Mr Speaker, the Minister has stood in this House and told this House that there has not been an increase in gang tensions—

💬 SPEAKER: A point of order?

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: And my point of order is that she has come nowhere close, again, to addressing the question.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, I might have had some sympathy for the member if the answer wasn’t being shouted down by Mr Doocey and others. If I could hear all of the answer, I might have ruled in the member’s favour, but I couldn’t. It might have been in there somewhere—I don’t know—and you can talk to Mr Doocey about his noise.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Could the Minister please provide her definition of gang tensions?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: It’s a tension between gangs.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Has gang violence increased or decreased under her watch?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: If I can point to the National Gang List that the National Party seems to rely on, which has had a drop of 500 since August last year, and if I can also point to the fact that we are now charging gang activity at 92 percent, a much higher rate than has ever been before.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Does she agree with the claim made last week that increased gang activity, or increased gang tension, is a result of the deportation of 501s from Australia, as claimed on breakfast television last week by the Leader of the Opposition?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: What I can agree with is that the 501s have added an element which is very troubling into our gang environment, and it did start under the National Government. Their response was to write a gang action plan in 2016 which they did not implement. In fact, the gang action plan was implemented by our Government.