Oral Questions

1. to the Minister of Education: What is the Government doing to encourage healthy drinks in schools?

This morning, I announced that we’re beginning public consultation on a proposal for primary schools to only offer healthy drinks. We know that, if kids eat and drink well, there are a myriad of benefits and good outcomes for learning. While some schools have already seen these results and chosen to put their own healthy drinks policies in place, we want to hear what people think about whether we can replicate those benefits across all primary schools and all young people, parents, and teachers.

💬 Angela Roberts: Why does the Minister consider a greater emphasis on healthy drinks in schools to be important at this time?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Research shows us that dental decay is now the most common disease reported amongst children in New Zealand, and rates of obesity amongst CHILDREN have increased significantly between September 2020 and August 2021. Further, sugar-sweetened beverages account for more than a quarter of a child’s sugar intake here in New Zealand. That’s why we want to ask what people think about all primary schools offering only healthy drinks—healthy drinks being defined as “water, milk, and non-dairy milk alternatives”.

💬 Angela Roberts: What is his approach to healthy drinks in secondary schools?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The initial proposal—the one that we’re consulting on—is for healthy drinks in primary schools. Evidence shows that the earlier in a child’s development that healthy habits can be encouraged, the better. However, the Government is also considering whether a similar policy could be considered in the future in secondary schools, and we want to get feedback on that as well, including from schools and communities, about what barriers might exist to implementing such a policy. The consultation’s being run by the Ministry of Education; it is open for eight weeks up until 2 June.

Question No. 2—Social Development and Employment

2. to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Does she agree with the Child Poverty Action Group, who said in October 2021, “in the face of abundant evidence that the stop-gap measures initiated in the first 2020 lockdown for low-income families were nowhere near enough, this year, unbelievably, the Government has done even less”; if not, why not?

No, I don’t agree with the statement. This Government has made once-in-a-generation increases to incomes for those on a benefit and is continuing to lift incomes for New Zealand families. Our 1 April changes benefited over 1.4 million New Zealanders. However, supporting low-income families is about more than just income support, which is why the Government has a wide range of initiatives that will benefit families, including building more social housing, free doctors’ visits, lunches in schools, and free period products. On top of that, as part of our COVID response, we have set up our care in the community model in order to effectively meet the needs of people and whānau while in self-isolation. This is a Government that has successfully supported New Zealand families through a global pandemic, with measures like the wage subsidy, main benefit increases, and lifting the minimum wage. But, as I’ve always said, we recognise we have more to do.

💬 Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: What is she doing to ensure food security for whānau as we come into winter, given that vegetable prices increased 19 percent in the year to September 2021 and food box usage more than doubled, and that we know the situation will now be much worse with even higher inflation?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: The support for food security in New Zealand stretches back before we experienced the inflationary increases that we’re experiencing at the moment. I think back to Budget 2020, when we put $32 million towards our food secure network, the first time that there’d been that level of investment. And, with regard to supporting families to be able to self-isolate safely, we’ve also invested millions of dollars into our care in communities programme across the country. If we look at our food security budget, of the about $30.1 million in total funding, that’s only a portion of the care in community funding. But food security is front of mind for us, and we’ve absolutely acted in a myriad of ways over the course of our time in Government.

💬 Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Does she stand by the Government’s decision last year to not bring in further lockdown-related benefit increases or double the winter energy payment, and will she take a different approach this year and at least double the winter energy payment?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: The benefit increases that we have seen are a once-in-a-generation increase. They reverse the cuts that were made back in 1991. They do respond to the Welfare Expert Advisory Group’s recommendations with regard to increases to benefits. I do recognise that it was two years on, but we went above and beyond for families that have children. On top of that, we didn’t just increase benefits. On 1 April, that member would have seen that we increased the family tax credit, we increased the minimum wage to $21.20, and, on top of that, we see a reasonably significant increase for superannuitants as well. These are the families that needed to have targeted assistance during this time. And so, yes, we stand by our decisions as a Government.

💬 Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Will she ensure that all low-income whānau are eligible for Working for Families payments, and, if not, why not?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: There’s criteria in place with regard to Working for Families. I do encourage all whānau to check that they are accessing what they are eligible for with regard to Working for Families, but also, with respect to supplementary supports through the Ministry of Social Development, I’m always concerned that there’s, potentially, families out there that are not accessing supports like accommodation supplement or child-care assistance. We do have an eligibility calculator on the website now so whānau can check for themselves what they might be eligible for. We want to support any whānau that is experiencing hardship at this time. With regard to further changes to Working for Families, we have said publicly there is a review of Working for Families under way, but that didn’t stop us from increasing the family tax credits on 1 April.

💬 Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Does she accept the statement of Dr Renee Liang that “The populations most affected by COVID and most likely to die from it are those living under socio-economic strain and indigenous populations.” and, therefore, agree that means Government has a responsibility to urgently lift incomes and reduce costs for low-income whānau such as through benefit increases, tax relief, and much quicker increases in the minimum wage?

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: In so far as the Minister has responsibility for that.

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: That was a very long quote. For the main part, yes, I do agree. We do recognise that low socio-economic whānau often have that intersection with regard to a range of other population groups, which means that often they are more at risk with regard to things like COVID. With respect to the actual initiatives that have been mentioned, we have done many of those things, if not all of them. We have lifted incomes for beneficiaries; also, for low-income workers, with respect to the minimum wage; also, put more money into the pockets of students and superannuitants, and those are the targeted groups I believe that member was referring to, and they have absolutely been front of mind for us alongside—can I just add, disabled people here in New Zealand. They have been absolutely front of mind for us with regard to every action we have taken in response to the pandemic.

Question No. 3—Prime Minister

3. to the Prime Minister: Does she have confidence in all of her Ministers?

on behalf of the Prime Minister: Yes. In particular, I have confidence in Ministers who have helped deliver 3.2 percent unemployment, more than 5 percent annual average economic growth, a reduction in the indicators of child poverty across the board, and a world-leading COVID-19 response—to name a few. I also have confidence in Ministers who have prioritised the safety of our communities by significantly increasing police funding by $450 million since we took office. I stand by Ministers who are supporting the police to deploy 700 more organised crime staff to bust gangs. I’ve got confidence in Ministers who are progressing legislation through this House that will give police more tools to address gang violence. And, finally, I have confidence in Ministers who’ve understood and prioritised the need for more police, which is why we have put 1,400 more cops on the front line.

💬 Nicola Willis: Was it acceptable for the police Minister to dismiss media questions about a blowout in police response times saying, “I’m not kind of prepared to step into that.” and “I’m not over the detail of that.”?

On behalf of the Prime Minister, in the 13 years that I have been in the House, I have heard each and every police Minister refer to matters as being operational matters. What I haven’t been able to hear, until recently, is the $450 million extra that this Government has put into the police, the 1,400 front-line cops that this Government is supporting the police with. That’s the difference.

💬 Nicola Willis: Is it the Prime Minister’s position that the Minister of Police should take no interest in police operational matters relating to how long it takes for a New Zealander to get a police officer to come and see them when they report a crime?

The Minister of Police has the job of overseeing the police portfolio, which means making sure they have the resources they need to do the job. So, rather than the last National Government, who froze police funding, the police Minister’s overseeing a $450 million increase in that. We’ve got 1,400 more cops on the front line. The police Minister has the confidence of the Prime Minister because she is overseeing record levels of investment.

💬 Nicola Willis: So is it the Prime Minister’s position that all the Minister of Police needs to do is sign off on the funding and the press releases and take no interest in the results that are delivered?

No, the Minister of Police takes a great deal of interest in the results that are delivered. For example, the results that have been delivered by Operation Bloodhound, which was announced today, with more than 30 people arrested associated with gangs in the eastern district, 30 firearms being taken out of the hands of gang members and associates, and large amounts of cash being seized, with approximately $100,000 taken from a gang headquarters in Napier. That’s something that the Minister of Police is taking a significant interest in.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Has she seen any reports suggesting that one in eight of New Zealand’s police was involved in protecting New Zealand Parliament, and has she seen any further criticism that, in fact, more police should have been involved earlier on in that operation?

I think all members of the House would be grateful for the role that the New Zealand Police have played throughout the time of COVID-19, and particularly in protecting this building here and the people who work around it. We should be grateful for the role that New Zealand Police are playing.

💬 Nicola Willis: Is the Prime Minister aware that the average response time for police has more than doubled, and is it seriously her position that this is not a matter the police Minister should take an interest in?

As I said, in answer to earlier questions, the police Minister takes her role seriously in making sure that the police have the resources that they need to be able to support and protect New Zealanders.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Has the Prime Minister seen reports that the numbers just referred to in the question that she has just answered were taken in the context of a significant COVID-19 outbreak while a number of police—up to one in eight of our police—were involved in protecting New Zealand’s Parliament?

The police force in New Zealand have played a significant role in protecting New Zealanders through COVID-19—that has included not only work at managed isolation and quarantine but also work around borders and also work around this building here. The New Zealand Police Force have had a very difficult job to do through a very stressful time of COVID-19, and we should all be grateful to them.

💬 Nicola Willis: Does it concern the Prime Minister that the Leader of the House was able to provide more detail about police response times than the Minister of Police, and is this the standard that this Prime Minister is prepared to accept?

On behalf of the Prime Minister, what concerns me is that a National Party who froze police funding, who did not provide police with the resources that they need, can stand up here, in this House today, and lecture this Government. This Government is proud of the fact that we’ve invested for 1,400 more cops to be on the front line, 700 cops dedicated to organised crime, and we’re busting up gangs—including Operation Bloodhound, that we saw today.

💬 Simeon Brown: $2.75 million to the gangs.

💬 Nicola Willis: Has she—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! No. Simeon Brown, you will stand, withdraw, and apologise.

💬 Simeon Brown: I withdraw and apologise.

💬 Nicola Willis: Has she or her office bothered to even have a conversation with the Minister of Police to encourage her to get across the detail of the significant matter in her portfolio?

On behalf of the Prime Minister: the Prime Minister and her office engage on a daily basis with Ministers, and, during those engagements with the Minister of Police, I’m sure the Minister and the Prime Minister have shared the fact that we are proud of a New Zealand Police Force that, just today, has broken up gangs in the Hawke’s Bay, in the eastern district; that is part of Operation Tauwhiro that seized over 1,500 firearms, arrested over 1,200 people, seized over 50 kilograms of methamphetamine, and conducted 900 searches under warrant. That is what you get when a Government properly funds the police and doesn’t freeze funding for the police.

Question No. 4—Environment

4. to the Minister for the Environment: What announcements has the Government made about supporting the restoration of waterways?

Today, the Government announced a Jobs for Nature project in partnership with Porirua City Council, Ngāti Toa, and Sustainable Coastlines to restore the health of the Porirua Harbour. Porirua Harbour is the largest estuary in the lower North Island and once was plentiful with pipi, mussels, oyster, and tuna. I’ve just come back from the estuary. It is obvious that the tens of thousands of tonnes of sediment from road and subdivision earthworks and some agricultural practices are degrading the estuary. Remedial action is clearly needed, and I commend the efforts of the local community.

💬 Barbara Edmonds: How will the Jobs for Nature project support employment and improved environmental outcomes in Porirua?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: This is a long-term project. It will plant some 630,000 plants in many kilometres of riparian planting and fencing, as well as fund weed and pest control. An integral part of the programme is providing training and skills that improve capability. The funding will also support the Integrated Catchment Management Plan. Fine-scale LiDAR data for every stream and all parts of the harbour, enabled by the Provincial Growth Fund, is helping drive down costs for this project while also assisting developers in the community. Coupled with the training, this project is driving productivity upwards as well as improved environmental outcomes.

💬 Barbara Edmonds: How is the Jobs for Nature programme tracking in its first 18 months?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: Well, it’s having a significant impact on the environment and our communities over the last year and a half it’s been running. As of December 2021, the programme has funded over 380 projects, with more than 7,000 people employed. This progress is great to see. Across all these projects, over 4 million plants have gone into the ground, with many freshwater habitats being restored. It’s leveraging council, private sector, and community action to help clean up our environment and improve our waterways.

Question No. 5—Housing (Public Housing)

5. to the Associate Minister of Housing (Public Housing): How many people were on the Housing Register in September 2017 compared to today, and what is the median wait time for people on the Housing Register to be housed in public housing?

The housing register reflects the strong emphasis that we have placed on people coming forward and telling us if they need housing support, and the long-standing failure to build the homes New Zealanders need that we inherited. The register has increased by 20,485 applications since September 2017, when there were 5,844 applications. The median days to house is 234. Since September 2017, we have housed 29,501 households, and in that time we have overseen record building consents, up 25 percent on 2021, added over 8,900 new public homes, and we are on track to deliver the 18,000 additional public and transitional homes to be built and delivered by 2024.

💬 Chris Bishop: Does she think that rent increases of $150 a week since 2017 have contributed to the housing register quintupling since 2017?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: There are a range of considerations when addressing the issue of the register and the wait times, and one of them is the fact that we inherited a housing crisis that the previous Government ignored and we are determined to fix. We’re making good progress, but it will take some more time.

💬 Chris Bishop: Just in reference to the last part of her answer—that we need more time—has she been advised as to when the housing register will return to the levels it was in September 2017, and, if so, what is it?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: There is no acceptable number. We want to ensure that people are housed in affordable, warm, dry housing, and that’s why this Government has committed to building more public housing. We do that because we want to ensure that, when people feel the need, they can come forward to the Ministry of Social Development and express their need for housing.

💬 Chris Bishop: Point of order, Mr Speaker. It was quite a specific question, which was whether or not the Minister had received advice as to when the housing register numbers will decrease back down to 2017 levels. It was a reference to the Minister’s first supplementary answer in relation to the Government needing more time. I’m seeking to find out exactly how much more time they need and when that might be.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Minister did speak to part of that. I’m not sure she mentioned if it was official information. Maybe the Minister would like to clarify.

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: No.

💬 Chris Bishop: How many children are living in emergency housing whose families are on the housing register?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: It’s never acceptable for children to be in emergency housing, and that’s why what we are doing is ensuring that we build more public housing. It would be important for the member to recognise that emergency housing is part of another delegation, and I would welcome the opportunity, if the member wishes to choose it, for the member to put that question in writing and I would pass it on to the Minister who is responsible for that work.

💬 Chris Bishop: Point of order, Mr Speaker. It’s correct, somewhat oddly, that the Minister for Social Development and Employment is responsible for emergency housing but the Associate Minister of Housing (Public Housing) is responsible for the housing register. And my question was: how many children are living in emergency housing whose families are on the housing register? The Minister does have responsibility for that, and I’d ask you to get her to address the question.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: I actually think she did, but I’ll give the member one more supplementary. There’s enough doubt for him to explore that again.

💬 Chris Bishop: Has she been advised as to the increase in the number of children who are living in emergency housing whose families are also on the housing register, and, if so, what is it?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: As I’ve just said, we are talking about two different responsibilities here. My role in public housing is to ensure that we provide sufficient housing for our people on the public housing register to move off. The circumstances of that is that people come to us with a range of needs. If the member would like to know if people are in emergency housing, I can pass those questions on to the Minister responsible. That member should put his question in writing to me.

💬 Chris Bishop: Why is the Minister not across the detail of her portfolio to the extent where she does not know how many children are growing up in motels who are on the housing register that she is responsible for solving or addressing?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: There are a range of circumstances that people on the housing register are in, including whether they have been living in substandard homes, whether they have been dealing with life circumstances that have made things very difficult for them. My role is to ensure that we support the build of housing so that we can move people from the register into warm, dry, safe, affordable accommodation, and that’s what this Government is doing.

💬 Chris Bishop: Has she had a conversation with the Associate Minister of Housing Marama Davidson regarding her open letter calling for rent controls, and, if she has had a conversation, in that conversation, did she suggest to the Associate Minister that, as a Minister of the Crown, she perhaps had some responsibility and some influence over Government housing policy, such that she wouldn’t need to write an open letter to the Prime Minister of the Government in which she serves?

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Clearly, the Minister answering this question is not responsible for the subject matter that the member has raised.

💬 Chris Bishop: Speaking to the point of order. The question was around whether or not she had a conversation with the Associate Minister of Housing Marama Davidson. The Minister is definitely responsible for a conversation she’s had with their Associate Minister, I hope.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yeah, but on the other hand—[Members interjecting] Order! No, your question went on to include issues and factors that the Minister is not responsible for. She can answer the first part of the question.

💬 Chris Bishop: Point of order. We are in a bit of a difficulty here, because the Associate Minister of Housing Marama Davidson has written an open letter to the Prime Minister, and my question is a very simple one, which is whether or not Minister Williams, in the Associate Minister role—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yeah, I heard what the question was, and I’ve made a ruling. [Members interjecting] No, sit down. No one’s speaking to the point of—I have made a ruling and the Minister can address the first part of the question, in so far as she’s responsible for it.

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have conversations with Minister Davidson all the time on a range of issues concerning housing, concerning family and sexual violence, and a whole range of other concerns.

💬 Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker, just seeking your advice with regards to that line of questioning that’s just occurred. It was incredibly confusing, because incorrect assertions around people’s portfolios were made and the wrong responsibilities—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, that is not a point of order. That is not a point of order. You cannot take a point of order to seek advice. I’ve made the ruling, and that ruling stands.

Question No. 6—Internal Affairs

6. to the Minister of Internal Affairs: What work is the Government progressing to reduce gambling harm in vulnerable communities?

I have announced a review of the regulation of class 4 gaming machines, otherwise known as “pokies”. Pokies are known to be the most harmful form of land-based gambling in Aotearoa, with one in five players considered to be at risk from gambling harm. The review, which is now under way, aims to target and reduce harms experienced by some who use pokies, and those close to them. As the Minister of Internal Affairs, I am committed to ensuring our regulations are working to reduce harm as much as possible, and we have the necessary enforcement tools for non-compliance.

💬 Dr Emily Henderson: Why is a review of class 4 gambling machines needed?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: Harm caused by pokies gambling contributes to the majority of referrals to gambling treatment providers. We know it’s a major cause of second-hand gambling harm experienced by a gambler’s whānau and friends. Data from the 2020 Health and Lifestyles Survey indicates that about 10 percent of New Zealanders use pokies. While some may consider pokies a form of recreational fun, for far too many Kiwis and their families they cause serious mental, financial, and social harms. We also know that gambling harm tends to adversely affect those who can least afford it and may already be experiencing social or financial challenges. That is why I’m taking action to ensure our legislation is fit for purpose and appropriate interventions are in place to reduce harm.

💬 Dr Emily Henderson: What is in scope of the review?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: The review will bring greater clarity around what venues need to do to identify and support at-risk gamblers. We’re also looking at pokie machine features and technology options, as well as strengthening enforcement for non-compliance. There is a focus on prescriptive tools that will discourage continuous harmful gambling. The discussion document is publicly available now, and I encourage anyone who has been affected by gambling harm, or knows someone who has, to make a submission. We have a chance to improve lives and make meaningful change. Feedback from public consultation, in addition to harm treatment providers, societies, and gambling venues, will help us create regulations informed by gamblers, their whānau and friends, and people who work with those experiencing harm.

Question No. 7—Police

7. to the Minister of Police: Does she stand by her statement regarding the reported blowout in police response times, “I am not over the detail of that”; if so, why?

Yes, in the context my statement was made. There are a number of points I would like to confirm to the member in regards to police response times. Response times for emergencies have remained stable, with the median response time in urban areas around eight minutes over the past four years. The response times significantly fluctuate during the year and across New Zealand, and tend to be higher over the summer period. There have been unprecedented pressures on the police due to multiple COVID outbreaks, which have had a significant impact on police resourcing and response times. As a Government, we are committed to support police, and that’s why we have invested significantly in police resourcing.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Does she believe it is acceptable that some Kiwis are waiting nearly two hours for police to respond to serious incidents?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: No, I do not, but what I am supportive of is the fact that, despite the fact that police have been significantly impacted by COVID—the temporary COVID spike—they have been working significantly to support the members in this House. They have been working at managed isolation and quarantine (MIQ). The numbers that were reported in the Official Information Act request that the member has been referencing relate to February 2022, when these conditions were at their peak. And, despite all the pressures on the police, they were still able to deliver an emergency response that was within or around eight minutes, which is within the same kind of time over the last four years. So it has not significantly increased. And that is because they have been supported by this Government to deliver, because we have put 1,400 extra cops on the beat and invested heavily in them by adding $450 million into supporting police.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Did crime increase or decrease over the COVID spikes?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: There are two different priority areas that the police respond to: priority 1, which is the emergency response time, which I’ve already said has stayed around eight minutes regardless of the pressure on the police. The second part of their priorities—priority 2—has seen an increase, and that has primarily been in the area of family harm. We know that some of the most significant and important calls to the service are in the family harm area, and our police respond. And they do that because they have been supported by this Government with an extra 1,400 police on the beat and record investment.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Point of order, Mr Speaker. In her response, the police Minister referred to COVID spikes as being a reason for an increase in police response times, and I asked her a very clear and direct question: “Has crime increased or decreased during the COVID spikes?” She didn’t address that at all.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yes, she did.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Is there a link between an increase in gang violence and a reduction in police response times?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: Has the member got some research that indicates that? In my view, Operation Tauwhiro—taking 1,000 gang arrests, taking 1,500 gang firearms off the streets, and taking 52 kilos of gang meth—is just one example of the work that the New Zealand Police do every single day to break the back of the gangs in this country. I find every single time that member stands in this House, he criticises the work of the New Zealand Police. And I back the police, this Government backs the police, and we do it by ensuring they have the investment they need to do the work that they need.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: What is the targeted time for priority 2 events?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: As soon as possible would be great, but the police have experienced—particularly in February 2022, which is where that member is taking his particular information from. That was at a time when police were impacted by COVID. They are our front line. Not only were they impacted by COVID, they put themselves in harm’s way of COVID all the time. They were off being isolated, there were hundreds of cops here protecting us, and they were in MIQ. Now, that is the time when that member chose to look at response times, and it is an absolute credit to the New Zealand Police that they were able to respond to emergencies in the same time frames, and that is because we have invested in police and they have the resources to do so. If it had been under National, where they froze budgets and they cut—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! I think that’s been addressed.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I am seeking your guidance on this, as my primary is very specific and it deals with response times, and I asked the Minister a very specific question—“What is the targeted time for priority 2 events?”—which she has spoken to, and she did not answer that question.

💬 SPEAKER: She did actually address the question. Although she did not give a specific time, she did address the question.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Is a home invasion a category 1 or a category 2 offence?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: It’s a significant category 1 event.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Is the Minister sure about that?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: The police respond to category 1 events where there is a threat of harm to that person, and I would expect the police to be dealing with that as quickly as possible.

Question No. 8—Social Development and Employment

My question is to the Minister for Social Development and Employment—[Interruption]

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Sorry to interrupt the member. Interjections during questions are out of order. You know who you are. I’ll let you start again, Karen Chhour.

8. to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Does she believe that jobseeker beneficiaries who fail to meet their work obligations should have their benefits reduced; if so, why were work-related benefit sanctions in the last quarter of the last year less than half what they were in 2019?

Only if it is appropriate to do so, and as a last resort. The Ministry of Social Development (MSD) has changed its way of working during COVID-19. Staff are more proactive with clients and offer more phone engagements, in line with the alert and traffic light settings. The member will notice the number of people sanctioned for failing to prepare for work has remained steady over this time period, and almost all the drop-off in sanctions is for failing to turn up to an appointment. This reflects the changed environment due to COVID-19, as well as increased Government investment in front-line work-focused case management. I’d also like to point out the big drop in the number of parents with dependent children who are sanctioned. This fell from 1,980 in December 2019 to 579 in December 2021. MSD are working more closely with clients to understand the reason for their non-compliance and make it easier to re-comply if they have children. Our new ways of working have been successful. Last year, more people moved off a main benefit and into work than at any time since electronic records were kept, a trend which is continuing in 2022.

💬 Karen Chhour: If someone on jobseeker support does not have an exemption for health reasons and refuses to fulfil a suitable job vacancy, should they be able to stay on their full benefit with no consequences?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Every person’s situation on the benefit is different, and it’s important that the Ministry of Social Development and the case managers recognise that. We also need to begin from the starting point of assuming that the vast majority of people who are on benefit do want to work. MSD’s job is to support them into the job opportunities that are available, that are best suited to them, and work to ensure that the work they take up is sustainable and meaningful for them and good for them and their whānau.

💬 Karen Chhour: Is it fair to use hard-working Kiwis’ taxes to pay for 106,000 work-ready jobseeker beneficiaries when many industries are crying out for labour, with some having to shut their doors due to understaffing?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: What is not fair is to use the politics of divide and rule by trying to pit those “hard-working” New Zealanders against people that are on benefit. Many of us in this House would have had a stint on benefit at some point in time. We’re no longer on it. We didn’t have the intention to stay on it. We always had aspirations to get out and work for ourselves and our whānau, and that is what the vast majority of beneficiaries also have. There’s also a cohort of New Zealanders who struggle to get into work for a range of other reasons, including health conditions and disabilities, and for far too long they have been under-invested in. It’s not just about expecting the person on benefit to get off benefit and go and work. It’s about a Government being committed to breaking down the barriers to them being able to take up employment.

💬 Karen Chhour: Why, when so many businesses need staff, have the average future years on a benefit risen from 10.6 years in 2017 to 12.4 years in 2021?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: I saw some recent information that came through to my office yesterday that actually saw there’s been a reasonably significant increase in the number of New Zealanders who were exiting benefit and still in employment six months later. This is what we’ve been focused on since day one in Government—is not just seeing getting people off benefit as the win, which the previous Government saw as a win, regardless of where they went, but actually supporting them into sustainable, meaningful employment so that they are able to continue to work for them and their whānau and, hopefully, with the right support, not return to benefit.

Question No. 9—Transport

9. to the Minister of Transport: What updates has he seen regarding the Government’s Clean Car Programme?

Very good news. I can confirm that the Clean Car Discount programme is off to an electric start, with already over 12,000 rebates processed and paid out. This means that more Kiwis are getting behind the wheel of more affordable zero- and low-emissions vehicles. With today’s milestone, electric and hybrid vehicles now make up over 1 percent of New Zealand’s light vehicle fleet, with monthly sales generally double or triple what we were seeing before the Clean Car Discount programme—and we have strong endorsement from the Leader of the House as well. By choosing to purchase zero- or low-emissions vehicles, New Zealanders are collectively helping our nation transition to a cleaner and a more efficient vehicle fleet.

💬 Shanan Halbert: What recent changes have been made to the programme?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: Major changes came into effect from 1 April, whereby the rebates will be available to a wider range of used and new fuel-efficient hybrid and electric vehicles based on their fuel efficiency. This extension will help even more Kiwis to make the change to more efficient vehicles and—given increased petrol costs—will assist them in lowering their household costs. Everyone who’s buying an imported vehicle now has more opportunities to join our efforts to clean up our fleet, reduce emissions, and make our country more resilient against energy shocks. Our Government has a comprehensive policy in response to the climate emergency, focused on the critical task of decarbonising the transport system—not just myopically building more roads.

💬 Shanan Halbert: How is the programme helping Aotearoa New Zealand achieve our emissions targets?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: New Zealand sits at the end of a long supply chain and risks becoming a dumping ground for the world’s highest-emitting vehicles without these policies. The clean car scheme is helping to expedite the transition of our vehicle fleet, and doing so is putting a massive dent in our vehicle emissions, which make up 43 percent of New Zealand’s carbon dioxide emissions. Over the life of a car, clean cars are proven to have lower costs in the long run once maintenance and fuel costs are taken into account, meaning they save Kiwis money as well.

Question No. 10—Immigration

10. to the Minister of Immigration: Are there migrant doctors or nurses currently in New Zealand who are not eligible to apply for the 2021 Resident Visa, and, if there are, will he change the criteria so that all migrant doctors and nurses are eligible to apply to stay in New Zealand?

The 2021 resident visa (R21) provides a one-off and streamlined pathway to residence for over 165,000 migrants. To meet the very simple and straightforward eligibility criteria, applicants must be on an eligible work visa and then either be settled, working in a scarce role, or be highly skilled. We did this to provide certainty to a large number of workers and their employers. It’s almost certain that there are migrants in New Zealand working in health who may fall outside the criteria due to their being on either a student or working holiday visa. The focus of the 2021 resident visa was to secure those already working in New Zealand on a work visa. I’m pleased to say that of the 90,000 applications that we have already received, over 2,500 applications have come from people working in health and aged care; this includes 775 registered nurses, 946 personal care assistants, 83 pharmacy technicians, 69 aged or disability carers, and 21 general practitioners—all people working in health who will have certainty of residency very soon.

💬 Erica Stanford: Does he honestly believe that the hundreds of nurses who are now working in our hospitals should miss out on the 2021 residency visa just because they were on a student visa last year while completing their New Zealand nursing degree, given that we are 4,000 nurses short?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: As I said, the 2021 residency visa is a one-off and streamlined visa process. The eligibility for that—or the applications close for that in July. That does not mean residency will disappear altogether, and I will remind the member that those people who want to stay in the country and whose skills we need will be able to apply under normal conditions when we return our focus back to normal conditions and away from the focus on the resident visa.

💬 Erica Stanford: Is the Minister telling migrant doctors and nurses who are not eligible for R21, who are packing up and leaving New Zealand right now, that they should wait for some indeterminate date in the future that he won’t say before they know if they are eligible for residence?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: No; they are the words of the member asking the question. What I’m saying is that there is a one-off visa opportunity for the people who are eligible. For those who are not and we need their skills, we still want you and we need your skills in the country, and, when we return to normal residency settings, they can apply.

💬 Erica Stanford: Is the Minister willing to lose New Zealand - trained migrant nurses to offshore markets over a visa technicality that he has the ability to fix, when we are 4,000 nurses short across our DHBs and aged-care facilities?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: My message to some of the people who the member may be advocating for is that we need your skills and, while you may not be eligible for residence under the one-off 2021 residency scheme, we want to make sure that you can remain in the country and that you’ll have the opportunity to do that when our focus of processing and applications moves away from the residency visa process and to the normal residency process.

💬 Erica Stanford: Why is he so hung up on sticking to the R21 visa rules, rather than being flexible to allow doctors and nurses the option to apply for the residency visa now to stop them leaving New Zealand, when we have a critical shortage of healthcare workers?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: The 2021 residency visa, as I mentioned at the outset, was, we believe, open to about 110 applicants and, we forecast, to about 165 individuals as a whole when we get to that stage. They are a very broad criteria to make sure that we secure the workforce that has helped us through the last two or three years. That does include a lot of critical healthcare workers. I would say to those who are likely—and some warm congratulations because you will soon be residents, and to those who aren’t eligible that we still need your skills and, when we move our focus away from the current resident visa to make sure we can get those applications done quickly and secure that workforce, that you’re almost likely to be eligible for residency under the normal settings when we get back to those settings.

💬 Erica Stanford: Supplementary question.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: I’m sorry; the National Party has run out of supplementaries.

💬 Hon Kris Faafoi: Oh, again?

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

💬 Chris Bishop: Point of order, Mr Speaker. In light of the glee with which the Minister of Immigration greeted that, perhaps we could have another one or two supplementaries to continue the fun.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: No. [Interruption] Order!

Question No. 11—Commerce and Consumer Affairs

11. to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs: What recent announcements has he made regarding business transparency?

Good news: on behalf of the Government, I’ll be introducing a bill which will crack down on global and domestic criminals who use businesses to hide money-laundering for tax evasion and the financing of terrorism. The changes we have committed to making will make it easier to see who owns or controls a company—that is, who the beneficial owners are. This is about striking the right balance. We want to ensure we don’t leave the door open for criminals to take advantage, whilst at the same time we want to preserve our well-earned reputation for ease of doing business.

💬 Naisi Chen: Why is it important that the Government acts?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: The changes we’re making sit in line with the Government’s national security priorities to help identify threats, risks, and challenges to New Zealand’s security and wellbeing. It’ll also help to bring us in line with other jurisdictions. The Pandora and Panama papers highlighted some key vulnerabilities, which need to be addressed. New Zealanders deserve to know who they’re doing business with.

💬 Naisi Chen: So what changes has he proposed?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: When searching the Companies Register, it can be difficult to see the complete picture of a company’s ownership structure. A unique identifier number or serial number will be assigned to all beneficial owners, directors, and general partners of limited partnerships. It’ll mean the Companies Office will be able to confidently link individuals with all the entities they’re associated with, and this will be publicly available. Also, the use of a director’s residential address has previously been a proxy for an individual identifier, but it has not always worked effectively, especially where someone had multiple addresses. The implementation of the unique identifier system will make linking connected interests much simpler.

Question No. 12—Housing

12. to the Minister of Housing: Does she agree that rent prices are contributing to hardship; if so, what steps, if any, will she take to lower them?

In answer to the first part, like all fixed household expenses, rent can be a cause of material hardship for some people. This is why our Government has been working hard to improve household incomes, including increasing Working for Families tax credits, the minimum wage, benefits, and superannuation; indexing benefits annually to the increases in wages; and increasing the accommodation supplement from 1 April 2018. In response to the second part of the question, the Government has taken steps to specifically improve affordability for renters, including limiting rent increases to once per year, prohibiting landlords from seeking rental bids, and banning letting fees, but ultimately, the best way to lower rents is to increase the supply of affordable housing. It is important to recognise that rent increases are driven by long-run supply shortages in the housing market. This is the housing crisis that has been decades in the making, and it’s why this Government is so focused on delivering new supply. For example, the national increase for the Statistics New Zealand rents price increase for the year to February 2022 was 4.6 percent. In regions like Auckland and Canterbury, which have had a lot of residential building activity, and, therefore, increased supply, rents increased by 2.7 percent in Auckland and 3 percent in Canterbury for the same period.

Chlöe Swarbrick: How long, specifically, will it take for rents in Aotearoa to become affordable, with the Minister’s aforementioned supply-side interventions alone, noting that one quarter of renters currently spend more than 40 percent of their income on housing?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I think we find consensus through just about every economist in the country that will point to our current rental and housing crisis being a supply-side problem, amongst other things, but I think if you have a look at, for example, the Green Party’s aspiration to limit rent increases to 2.8 percent, as put out in their policy today, I think we can see that we’ve actually seen Auckland, through a supply-side intervention, already performing better than that, with rental price index increases limited to 2.7 percent.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Will the Minister seriously consider rent controls, or would she prefer to rely on the discretion of landlords to lower rents to affordable levels out of the goodness of their hearts?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I think we can point to a suite of policies that our Government has already put in place, like limiting to once a year, stopping bidding and letting fees, but I also point the member to Shamubeel Eaqub’s comment, who said that rent controls can have an unintended effect of slowing down the supply of housing in the rental market. He said, “It seems like a deceptively simple thing to do: just stop rents rising and everything will be fine … But it isn’t that simple, there are known consequences. It means that we are likely to have fewer rentals.” We have a housing crisis in New Zealand because we do not have enough houses, and our Government is absolutely committed to supply-side solutions.

Ricardo Menéndez March: How long does she expect it will take for all the people on the public housing waiting list to have a suitable secure and affordable home to live in?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: We have a public housing build programme that is the largest of any Government since the 1970s. One of the points of both sadness and frustration for us as a Government, however, is that we are making up for the squandered opportunities of the previous Government. Not only did they end up with 1,500 fewer houses than they started with, but if they had built at the same rate as we did, there would be over 22,000 more public houses in New Zealand today, accounting for 85 percent of the current waiting list. So, while we are pulling every lever, unfortunately we are playing catch-up for the gutting of public housing by the previous National Government.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Sorry, before the member asks a question, can I ask the Hon Kris Faafoi to stop shouting behind the Minister answering the question.

Ricardo Menéndez March: Does she believe she is pulling all the levers to fix the housing crisis, and, if so, will she consider an in-house construction entity to increase the supply of public housing, as proposed by FIRST Union in its A Ministry of Green Works for Aotearoa New Zealand report?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Our Government is under no illusions about the size and the complexity of the housing crisis. It is decades in the making, and there is no one single simple fix to the housing crisis. We have to be combining both supply and demand levers, and we have to make sure that we’re exploring every opportunity. I think that we can see that we are already starting to see the green shoots of some of that activity. If we look to Auckland and we look to Canterbury, we can see that we have had significantly lower rental price index increases in those centres because they are also the centres that have had increased supply of housing.