Oral Questions

1. to the Minister of Research, Science and Innovation: What action is the Government taking to support innovation in the aerospace sector?

Last week, I announced the Government is supporting Christchurch aerospace start-up Pyper Vision to develop a solution that could help make fog delays a thing of the past, in offering a solution to a multibillion-dollar problem. Pyper Vision’s solution uses drones to dispense a safe, water-absorbing, and environmentally-friendly product that soaks up moisture in the air and clears runway fog so that pilots and air traffic controllers can operate safely. The development of Pyper Vision’s technology will be supported through the Government’s Airspace Integration Trials programme, which supports the safe integration of autonomous aviation technologies into our existing transport system.

💬 Jamie Strange: Why is the Government supporting New Zealand’s aerospace sector?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: The Government has a vision for the New Zealand aerospace sector to be a diverse and inclusive sector that is thriving; supporting tens of thousands of high-wage jobs. The sector will be safe, innovative, and productive, with aerospace activities actively contributing to achieving our environmental goals. This could be a multibillion-dollar industry that leads the world in disruptive aerospace technologies, yet has low environmental impact, and could enhance sustainability across the New Zealand economy.

💬 Jamie Strange: What else has the Government done to support New Zealand’s aerospace sector?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: The Airspace Integration Trials programme was established in 2019 with Wisk, a leading international advanced aviation company, to support the trialling of autonomous passenger aircraft in Canterbury. Since then, the programme has received strong interest from both domestic and international companies, despite the impacts of COVID-19. The programme has now grown to have eight industry partners developing autonomous and remotely-piloted aircraft across a range of areas, including environmental monitoring, conservation, agriculture, cargo transport, and medical deliveries.

Question No. 2—Climate Change

2. to the Minister of Climate Change: Does he stand by the position he took in Parliament on 31 March that we do not need to reduce the national herd size, or the position he took on One News on 12 April that we do need to reduce the national herd size?

Yes.

💬 Mark Cameron: Why did the Minister change his position regarding herd sizes so abruptly in the space of just two weeks, and how can farmers have confidence in this Government when Cabinet Ministers are flip-flopping on their livelihoods?

💬 Hon JAMES SHAW: Well, in answer to the second part of the question, as I’ve said before in this House, that member needs to have more faith in New Zealand farmers and in the agricultural community. Farmers up and down the country have been reducing their emissions and increasing their profitability for a number of years.

💬 Mark Cameron: Has the Minister asked his ministerial colleagues about expediting methane mitigation technologies—which the Minister stated that the Government has invested roughly $200 million into over the past decade—to avoid slashing herd numbers and farmers’ bottom lines?

💬 Hon JAMES SHAW: In the member’s question there, he equates a drop in productivity to a drop in the bottom lines of farmers, and, actually, what the research shows is that farmers can actually increase their profitability whilst reducing their greenhouse gas emissions. That is the frustration with this particular debate. What the debate needs to focus on is the reduction in agricultural greenhouse gas emissions, rather than a really simplistic debate about the methodology that you might take to get there.

💬 Mark Cameron: Does he believe that reducing herd sizes is a wise decision when New Zealand’s agricultural sector feeds approximately 40 million people globally—roughly eight times our population—and contributes to global food security?

💬 Hon JAMES SHAW: Farmers themselves are actually the ones who are amongst the most vulnerable to the effects of climate change. The report that came out earlier this week demonstrated that the intensity of weather events, including droughts—that of course affect our agricultural sector—are increasing by about 15 percent as a result of climate change, and also that the frequency of those events is increasing by about 20 percent. That in itself cuts farmers’ bottom lines more than anything.

Question No. 3—Finance

3. to the Minister of Finance: Does the Minister agree with Treasury forecasts showing inflation will outstrip New Zealanders’ wages this year, and does he agree with Infometrics Chief Forecaster Gareth Kiernan that “The high cost of living and unaffordable housing threatens to create a brain drain over the next two years”?

As I said in the House yesterday, I agree that those are Treasury’s forecasts for the June 2022 year. As I also said yesterday, this is the only year in the forecast period in which inflation outstrips wages. As to the second part of the question, the rising cost of living is a global issue. I note that this week US inflation hit 8.5 percent, while the UK saw its inflation rate rise to 7 percent. We do recognise that many New Zealand families are finding it tough as Omicron, the resulting supply chain constraints, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and the general effect of the pandemic drive up prices around the world. That’s why we have acted to ease the impact on households, for example through the cutting of the fuel excise duty and also the big range of measures we brought in to support those on low and middle incomes. This will make a far greater difference to New Zealanders than the Opposition’s tired response of tax cuts for the most wealthy. In terms of Mr Kiernan’s statements, I would note that the Reserve Bank is expecting net migration to increase to 24,000 over the next couple of years.

💬 Nicola Willis: Is the Minister aware of a range of forecasts which show inflation in New Zealand forecast to be much higher than inflation in Australia, with ANZ forecasting we will hit 7.4 percent, while Australia will remain below 5 percent; and if he has seen those forecasts, how does he explain them?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Economic forecasts range for what will happen, both in New Zealand and Australia and around the world. What we do know is that the New Zealand economy is in a strong position to be able to manage the challenges of 2022, with low debt compared to other countries in the world, a quicker return to surplus than many other countries in the world, a lower unemployment rate than many other countries in the world, and annual average growth over 5 percent.

💬 Nicola Willis: Does the Minister share the view of a growing group of economists that the soaring cost of living, record low consumer confidence, and plummeting business confidence means New Zealanders can expect their economic fortunes to worsen in the next 12 months; and if not, why not?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I’ve said a number of times in this House, I understand that 2022 will be a challenging year for many New Zealand households. That’s the reason why this Government has invested particularly in low and middle income families, to make sure that they do have the resources that they need. We also understand that this is a global issue, and when global organisations like the IMF and Standard & Poor’s congratulate New Zealanders on how they have made it through the pandemic, and the economic performance of New Zealand, that is something that we can at least be pleased about in this challenging period of time.

💬 David Seymour: Does the Minister stand by his response to my question in the annual review debate whether the Government had overdone fiscal and monetary stimulus leading to excessive inflation, “It’s always easier in hindsight.”?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: No doubt many issues are easier to deal with in hindsight. What I am proud of is that this Government stepped in to support New Zealand businesses and households to make sure that people stayed in work, so that we’ve got 3.2 percent unemployment. I’m pleased that we stepped up to support businesses through things like the Small Business Cashflow Scheme, the Resurgence Support Payment, the wage subsidy. These were things that helped New Zealanders get through the pandemic, and, at the other end of it, we have an economy that is recognised by the likes of the IMF as doing well.

💬 Nicola Willis: Has he seen analysis by Infometrics chief forecaster Gareth Kiernan stating that, “Despite there being little rationale for further spending increases, growth in government consumption is still accelerating”; and can the Minister outline what specific steps he has taken to ensure all Government agencies are ensuring maximum value for expenditure?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: In answer to the first part of the question, it is worth reminding the member that, as a percentage of GDP, the spending that the Government has been doing over the last couple of years is very comparable with what the previous National Government did off the back of the global financial crisis. In fact, in 2009, as a percentage of GDP, National’s spending was 34.7 percent; for Labour in 2020 it was 34.3 percent. For National in 2010 it was 33.8 percent of GDP and for Labour it was 31.7 percent of GDP. Governments from time to time face crises like this. It is important that we use the balance sheet of the Government to support New Zealand businesses and households.

💬 Nicola Willis: Does the Minister continue to believe in the face of the cost of living crisis and accelerating inflation that it is prudent for him to add more spending to this year’s Budget than any finance Minister in the history of New Zealand?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The member needs to sort out her position because she has said on radio this week, I believe, that National would spend the same amount as the Labour Party. So she’s criticising her own Budget proposal, which is to spend the same amount, but the one difference is that side of the House would do it through untargeted tax cuts; on this side of the House we are going to invest it in the public services that New Zealanders need.

💬 Nicola Willis: Does the Minister consider it untargeted to ensure that middle-income New Zealanders squeezed by a growing cost of living and ineligible for Working for Families will get some tax relief in his Budget?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: What I consider untargeted is that people earning $180,000 a year would benefit the most from the member’s proposals whilst those on the minimum wage would get two bucks a week. The National Party could start by actually supporting some of the things that lift wages like the minimum wage increase, like the 1 April changes that this Government proposed.

💬 Nicola Willis: Does he agree with Westpac that “The March quarter inflation result is set to be another monster.”, and what is the Minister’s plan to support the Reserve Bank’s efforts to put a lid on the cost of living crisis?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As all commentators are saying, inflation in 2022 is a challenge right around the world and I look forward to the member lecturing Boris Johnson and Joe Biden about their total failure to control inflation. This is a global issue. On this side of the House we’ll continue to balance our fiscal policy to make sure we invest in health and in education and in housing and in transport—all the areas that the member’s party ignored for nine years.

Question No. 4—Health

4. to the Minister of Health: What progress has been made in establishing the new health entities as part of the Government’s health reforms?

The Government is well on track to deliver the transformational health reforms needed to address the inequities in our systems and capture the lessons of COVID-19. We have been making significant progress while the Health Committee has considered the Pae Ora (Healthy Futures) Bill. The interim Health New Zealand and Māori Health Authority entities have boards and also have appointed chief executives. The transition to and preparation for 1 July this year is well under way and this includes the transfer of personnel from the Ministry of Health to Health New Zealand and the Māori Health Authority. Alongside this, there has also been a substantial engagement programme, featuring more than 500 meetings with community and workforce stakeholders, and a national roadshow to communicate the objectives and benefits of the reform. Considerable progress has been made on the strategic documents which will steer the new system. These include the Government policy statement and the New Zealand health plan.

💬 Arena Williams: Why have some functions already transferred?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: We’ve consistently balanced the urgent need to make the changes New Zealanders expect, while making sure the health system continues to function. It’s important that the new entities are able to hit the ground running from day one. It’s equally important that there is minimal disruption to day to day functions, including the ongoing response to the COVID pandemic. For this reason, transfer of personnel has already commenced; the aim is to ensure that the transition is as seamless as possible.

💬 Arena Williams: What support, in particular, has the Minister seen for establishing the new Māori Health Authority?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: As I visit health services across New Zealand, I hear, time and time again, how important it is that the new system addresses longstanding inequities in health. Front-line health providers see this every day, and I’ve been overwhelmed by the support that I’ve seen for the authority. For instance, I note former Minister of Māori Affairs, the Hon Tau Henare, who said on 5 April that “This is the last shot at it, at fixing up some of the poor Māori health statistics. This is our one and only shot at fixing up what has been going on for the last hundred years.” I also appreciated the open letter from more than 35 health system providers and organisations, including the Cancer Society of New Zealand, General Practice New Zealand, the New Zealand Dementia Foundation, and Hāpai Te Hauora, who stated “The establishment of the Māori Health Authority / Te Mana Hauora Māori is central to Te Tiriti o Waitangi and will help ensure everyone has the same access to good health outcomes.” I look forward to the vital contribution the authority will make to our health system.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: Has the Māori Health Authority veto been removed in the Pae Ora (Healthy Futures) Bill reported back today; and if so, why?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: The Māori Health Authority, in the original legislation that entered the House, never had a veto, and the member has the bill available to him to read over the long Easter weekend.

Question No. 5—Housing

5. to the Minister of Housing: How many KiwiBuild houses were built in January 2022, if any, and is KiwiBuild performing to her expectations?

As of the end of January 2022, there were 917 new KiwiBuild houses being built, and 591 have been contracted and are due to begin construction soon. These will be in addition to the 1,304 KiwiBuild homes completed to date. None were completed in January. I note that January is always the quietest month in the building sector, where builders typically and traditionally take a well-deserved break. So this is in line with my expectations.

💬 Chris Bishop: Was her expectation of KiwiBuild that it would have built more than 1,304 houses since it began?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I notice the new spokesperson for housing for the National Party is taking the easy, classic, Lite FM line on KiwiBuild. He may not have noticed that there was a reset of the KiwiBuild scheme in September 2019, when targets were removed. KiwiBuild is performing to our expectations.

💬 Chris Bishop: In light of that answer, can she confirm that her expectation is that KiwiBuild will have only built just over 1,300 houses around 4½ years into the programme?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: What I can and will happily confirm to that member is that we are happy with the record of 1,304 houses being built, 917 currently under construction, and a further 591 due to begin construction very soon over a 4½ year period. I will put that against the 100 affordable houses the National Party in Government delivered over nine long years.

💬 Chris Bishop: Why has KiwiBuild only built 1,304 houses since it started?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Because the KiwiBuild programme had to start from a zero position of any Government support for the building of affordable housing. I point to the 100 houses that the special housing areas the National Party put in place delivered over nine years of Government.

💬 Chris Bishop: How many houses have been built at Ihumātao, following the purchase of land there through the KiwiBuild Land for Housing Programme?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: As the member well knows, the land at Ihumātao was not purchased for the purposes of KiwiBuild; it was purchased through the Land for Housing Programme. So there was never any intention of building KiwiBuild houses on that land.

💬 Chris Bishop: Has she received any advice in recent days in how changes, either up or down, in the official cash rate—including changes of up to 100 basis points—may affect how easy it is for people to purchase a KiwiBuild home and service the mortgage on it?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Ours is a Government that is always committed to policy settings that will help first-home buyers, and have a steady programme of work—so on most days, I receive advice.

Question No. 6—Environment

6. to the Minister for the Environment: How has Jobs for Nature supported regional communities?

Today, the Government announced another Jobs for Nature project to significantly scale up protecting whitebait spawning habitat īnanga in Northland. Whitebait numbers, sadly, are declining and it’s important that we act now to restore habitat. The Mountains to Sea Conservation Trust will improve spawning habitats in 25 waterways across the Far North; around 20,000 streamside plants will be planted; kilometres of fencing, together with animal and weed control, will help restore the habitat for whitebait.

💬 Rachel Boyack: How is Jobs for Nature supporting communities in the Nelson region?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: In the Nelson region, Project Mahitahi is a collaborative programme between the local council, iwi, and community partners to restore the ecological health of the Mahitahi Valley forest ecosystems. It’s a five-year project, which will plant around 125,000 plants, restore wetlands, and carry out pest and plant control. It aims to enhance water quality, reduce the spread of invasive plant species, and preserve rare indigenous tree species. It’s another example of Jobs for Nature making a tangible difference.

💬 Angie Warren-Clark: How is Jobs for Nature supporting regional communities in the Bay of Plenty?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: Another Jobs for Nature project is backing the Accelerating Bay of Plenty Freshwater Improvement project, helping fence 174 kilometres, 450,000 native plants, and these steps will help protect the region’s waterways and enhance biodiversity. Catchments covered in the project are the Pongakawa River, tributaries of the Waihī estuary, the Poraiti and Kaituna, Nukuhou catchments, and the Rotorua Te Arawa Lakes. They’re all experiencing high levels of contaminants from sedimentation and livestock nutrients, which is impacting on ecosystem health, swimming, and tuna. It’s a great example of central and local government working together with private landowners and iwi to put the health of the waterway first.

Question No. 7—Health

7. to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by all his statements and actions?

Yes. In particular I stand by the actions this Labour Government is taking to rebuild our public health system. We inherited a legacy of chronic under-funding, buildings left to rot, and the care available to patients having more to do with postcodes than needs. This Government is delivering record investment in health. We are building a whole new mental health system, we’re making the structural changes that patients and the health workforce have been crying out for, and we’re doing it all alongside a world-leading response to the global pandemic, which has allowed us to move to orange for the long weekend. “Orange”, we’re glad about that!

💬 Dr Shane Reti: When he told media in November last year that he would deliver a recruitment campaign for ICU nurses, why are there only three ICU nurses in jobs more than five months later?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: The member once again has his figures wrong. So 93 applications have been received following the six weeks of the recruitment campaign that goes through to 30 June; 22 of those applications have been considered and have been referred to DHBs ready to make job offers, and three people have been put into work already.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: Does he stand by his statement that employing only three ICU nurses after five months is “a good result, good progress so far”?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: No. Sadly, the member once again continues his track record of getting his figures wrong. He’s had to withdraw them once before—no doubt it will happen again. The campaign started in February and it has had 93 people lining up from around the world for it—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Sorry, someone is growling over this side. I don’t know—order! I’m on my feet. I’m serious, OK? I can’t even hear the Minister’s answer. If I hear that sound again, that person might be leaving the Chamber.

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: As I was saying, 93 people have applied and are now being actively considered; 22 have completed—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: I’m pretty sure that came from that direction. Was that you, Mr Bayly? No? Yes, well, it did come from that direction.

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I’ll say this for the benefit of Mr Bennett, who seems to have a frog in his throat at the very least. So we’ve had 93 people now enter the system who are now being subject to vetting; 22 have completed the vetting, their CVs have been received, and they’ve been referred to DHBs ready to have job offers made to them; and three people are so advanced in the process that they are already working.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: Can he confirm that Treasury’s recent rating of the ability of the ministry to deliver under his leadership as a D is the worst rating the ministry has ever had in its history, and when asked about the D by reporters, did he throw hard-working health workers under the bus when they reported “Health Minister Andrew Little was not exactly quick to defend the health system”?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I don’t think the House can rely on that member’s quoting of the thing. The reality is that we have had a ministry that has been tasked for the last two years to do an extraordinary range of things, not only to keep the health system running and monitoring it and doing its own commissioning and a whole bunch of operational activities but also to lead and manage our response to the COVID pandemic. That has put a lot of strain on everybody, and I think they can be forgiven for not being absolutely perfect in absolutely everything. But they’ve done a tremendous job in keeping New Zealanders safe and thousands of New Zealanders alive.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: Why would anyone have confidence in a health Minister whose leadership is associated with a D for delivery to now deliver a complete restructure of the entire health system?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: Very easily, because we are delivering, unlike that member and his party, who, in nine years in Government, when faced with a mental health crisis ignored it, when faced with faltering health services ignored them, and when they saw buildings crumbling ignored it. This is a Government that takes public health seriously, is making the investments, and is making the difference.

Question No. 8—Foreign Affairs

8. to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: How many people have been supported by Operation Whakahokinga Mai to get from Afghanistan to New Zealand since September last year?

Since the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan in August last year, the Government has successfully assisted more than 1,500 people to return to New Zealand. This total includes the nearly 400 individuals in the initial evacuation phase in August and the 1,182 so far that have been able to arrive safely to New Zealand. Operation Whakahokinga Mai was established after initial evacuation efforts were halted to help those in-scope that remained in Afghanistan to travel to New Zealand in such circumstances has been a real achievement and marks one of the largest humanitarian efforts undertaken by any New Zealand Government in recent decades. Many of these people faced grave risks under the Taliban. They have demonstrated great courage and resilience through this ordeal, and we welcome them here to Aotearoa. With nearly 90 percent of those we set out to assist now in New Zealand, winding down the operation is timely.

💬 Ingrid Leary: What did Operation Whakahokinga Mai do to assist people to travel to New Zealand?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Operation Whakahokinga Mai at times numbered more than 100 public servants from several agencies and in several countries. As part of Operation Whakahokinga Mai, the Afghanistan Departure Task force within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) played a key role in facilitating travel documentation, accommodation, and flights for those eligible for assistance. Managed isolation and quarantine access and resettlement services were organised by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment and were activated upon arrival to New Zealand. This was an intense operation for all those who were involved. The success of the operation was also made possible by the cooperation and hard work of many community advocates who engaged with the taskforce on a regular basis. I’m also grateful for the support from our partner countries, who played an important role in helping us to get our people safely from Afghanistan to Aotearoa. Due to the difficult circumstances in Afghanistan and the lack of commercial flights, the approach taken to support eligible people under Operation Whakahokinga Mai was unprecedented. This included extensive support for issuing visas, documentation, transit, and paying for flights and accommodation that went above and beyond regular consular support provided to New Zealanders overseas.

💬 Ingrid Leary: How many eligible people are remaining in Afghanistan, and what support are you giving them?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: In the six months since Operation Whakahokinga Mai was established, we’ve managed to bring nearly 90 percent of those we set out to assist. This leaves less than 200 eligible people in Afghanistan. Of those still remaining in Afghanistan, some face difficulties in obtaining suitable documentation for travel, while for others it is not clear if they intend to take up the support to travel to New Zealand for a variety of personal reasons. By the end of April we expect around that 97 percent of eligible people will have arrived in New Zealand. That’s why I’m signalling now the intent to wind down this operation, because on 29 April the Afghanistan Departure Taskforce will close and assistance, including payment for flights, accommodation, and third-country visas will instead be provided through relevant MFAT divisions. From 30 July onward, assistance will be provided on a case by case basis to those with exceptional circumstances preventing them travelling before this date.

Question No. 9—Immigration

9. to the Minister of Immigration: Does he stand by his statement regarding doctors and nurses not being eligible to apply for the 2021 Resident Visa that “we still want you and we still need your skills in the country, and, when we return to normal residency settings, then they can apply”; if so, can he explain what the criteria of the normal residency settings will be to give the doctors and nurses the certainty they need to stay in New Zealand?

Yes. Under the broad and streamlined 2021 resident visa policy, we have already received over 2,500 applications from migrants working in health and aged care. Officials expect around 10,000 migrants working in health and aged care are likely to be eligible. There are some migrants working in health who may fall outside the criteria due to being students or working holidaymakers. If these migrants want to stay in New Zealand, they can apply for a work visa to ensure they can continue to have work rights and a valid visa. Under established residency settings, these workers will qualify when the category reopens this year. We are rebalancing our immigration settings with the intent of promoting higher skills and higher wages. These changes are likely to be to the advantage of migrant doctors and nurses.

💬 Erica Stanford: Does he believe that these migrant doctors and nurses who are not eligible for 2021 residence will stay in New Zealand based on his advice that they should just wait for normal residence settings to resume, given he’s not able to exactly say what these normal residency settings will be?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: Those doctors and nurses are all most likely to have the ability to remain in New Zealand if they get themselves on the likes of an essential skills work visa. As I’ve said, the established criteria for residency are likely to mean these doctors and nurses are able to stay. As I say, we are continuing to work through the final parts of our rebalanced package, and they are likely to be advantaged by those settings.

💬 Erica Stanford: Is the Minister saying that the residency settings will not change later this year when he reopens them from what they are currently, so those doctors and nurses will be eligible under current residency settings?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: If the member had listened to the answer to both my primary and supplementary question, I’ve said that they’re likely to be eligible under the established residency criteria. We are looking at those, and when the skilled migrant category visa opens later this year—and as I said—the likes of doctors and nurses are likely to be advantaged by the new settings when we announce them.

💬 Erica Stanford: So which is it? Is it that doctors and nurses will be able to apply for residence under the established visa settings for residents that exist now, or will they be new settings with new points and potentially new pay settings?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: As I said to the member last week—which is the nexus of her primary question—we still want these people to remain in New Zealand. We need these skills. Under the current settings, they are likely to be able to stay. And as I said, under the proposed settings—and the principles around the proposed settings—they are likely to be advantaged by them. So their future looks good in New Zealand.

💬 Erica Stanford: What does he say to Angela, an emergency department nurse in Whangārei who is looking to head to the UK because she has been in residence limbo for three years, is not eligible for the 2021 resident visa, and cannot wait any longer for the certainty she needs to stay here?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: I would reflect what I’ve been saying to a number of questions that the member has been asking: if that person wants to stay in the country, they can continue to apply for a visa, and when the normal residency settings resume, once applications for the 2021 resident visa come to an end at July this year, then they will be able to—likely, shortly after that—apply for residency. The path is still open to them.

💬 Erica Stanford: Does he think that saying that there will be a pathway to residence at some point in the future for these doctors and nurses is a better policy response than just granting them residence now under 2021 residence in order to stop them from leaving; and, if so, why are they still leaving?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: When the Government took the decision to introduce the 2021 resident visa, we were dealing with a macro problem of employers wanting to make sure they had certainty and the employees wanting to make sure that they have certainty. That will, as forecast, be eligible for about 110,000 people who will be able to get residency. The numbers around working holiday scheme or visa holders in New Zealand at the moment are about 4,000, so it’s obviously a much smaller tranche. Those people within that tranche, who have the skills and the ability to stay on an essential skills work visa, can get a visa to ensure they can stay in the country, continue to work, and when the applications for the resident visa end in July of this year and the normal criteria for a skilled migrant category resume, those people will continue to be able to apply for residency.

Question No. 10—Workplace Relations and Safety

10. to the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety: Is he concerned that UNICEF ranked Aotearoa the third worst in the OCED for paid parental leave entitlements, and that working families face the most expensive childcare costs as a percentage of the average wage?

I acknowledge the report released by UNICEF and its conclusions on paid parental leave entitlements. I also note the report found that New Zealand achieves well in regards to the quality of childcare, in terms of child to teacher ratios, and in the qualifications of caregivers. I am proud that it’s been Labour-led Governments that have led the way on the provision of paid parental leave, including its introduction in 2002 and its increase to 26 weeks in the previous term of Government. I do note that the data tables on page 26 of the UNICEF report are based on 2018 data. Therefore, the league table results do not reflect the increase to 26 weeks of paid parental leave, which only fully took effect from 2020. Our Government does continue to support young families through the provision of paid parental leave but also, recently, our doubling of sick leave entitlements, our Families Package, improvements we’re making to the Holidays Act which will increase flexibility, and the upcoming winter energy payment. We always acknowledge that there is more to do. That’s why we’re committed to turning around the longstanding inequalities that some Kiwi families face.

💬 Jan Logie: Does the Minister think it’s equitable that the proposed Income Insurance Scheme will provide payments of up to $2,511 a week for 28 weeks, while new families getting paid parental leave will continue to have payments capped at $621 per week for only 26 weeks?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: One of the features of New Zealand’s paid parental leave scheme as compared to some of the jurisdictions that we’re compared to in the UNICEF report, of course, is that our paid parental leave is purely taxpayer-funded. Many of the comparable schemes around the world are funded through a mix of employer and employee contributions. As such, while we are always keen to increase and improve paid parental leave provisions, we do have to consider the range of other priorities that there are to support families. We’ve provided a lot of that support this term and, as I said in my previous answer, we’ll continue to look at what we can do, but we have to balance it against other priorities.

💬 Jan Logie: Does he agree we should be encouraging equity of caring responsibilities when it comes to pēpē, and if so, will he commit to additional leave entitlements for partners of people who have given birth?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: As the member will be aware, partners are entitled to unpaid paid parental leave over that period. There is a difference, of course, between that and the entitlement to paid parental leave that the mother is entitled to. I have recently asked officials for advice on improvements that can potentially be made to the paid parental leave, and that is one of the issues that I’m willing to consider. As I said in my previous answer, we’ll need to consider any investments in that area as compared to other priorities that we have to support working families.

💬 Jan Logie: Does he believe families are adequately supported when paid parental leave entitlements end at 26 weeks and the cost of unsubsidised childcare is 36 percent of the average wage, and 20 hours’ free early childhood education (ECE) doesn’t start until age three?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: I’m enormously proud of the investments that our Government has made into high-quality and accessible early childhood education, and one of the things that the UNICEF report notes is that New Zealand has real strengths in this area. We are committed to continuing to improve the range of supports that we provide to our young families. Whether it’s through paid parental leave, whether it’s through the Best Start payments that were introduced by this Government, or whether it’s through high-quality, accessible ECE, which we have put a lot more resource into, we’ll continue with that work, and we’ll continue to make sure that we make good decisions in the round to provide that support to young families.

💬 Jan Logie: What is the Government’s response to the call from UNICEF to extend and align the end of paid parental leave with the availability of childcare, and to introduce national targets to increase the affordability of childcare?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: As I’ve said in my primary answer, the Government does acknowledge and will consider those recommendations that are made. Obviously, my area of responsibility is in respect of paid parental leave. We believe that we have made a real difference with the extension to 26 weeks, and we’ll continue to look at improvements that we can make to that scheme.

Question No. 11—Prevention of Family and Sexual Violence

11. to the Minister for the Prevention of Family and Sexual Violence: Does she stand by her statement, “The Government is committed to reducing, and ultimately eliminating family violence and sexual violence”; if so, why as at 29 March had she received no briefings on family or sexual violence within emergency and transitional housing?

I really thank the member for her interest in our work to reduce and eliminate family violence and sexual violence, and my office will shortly invite her to a briefing to discuss it. In answer to the first part of the question, I do stand by my statement and am committed to reducing and, ultimately, eliminating family violence and sexual violence. Every instance of violence is one that I take seriously. In answer to the second part of the question, as Minister for the Prevention of Family Violence and Sexual Violence I am responsible for leading the whole-of-Government approach to substantially prevent, reduce, and address these forms of violence. I discuss issues like the member raised with my ministerial colleagues. What I already know is that we have issues in Aotearoa with these forms of violence throughout all of our communities. My focus is on implementing Te Aorerekura, a strategy to eliminate family violence and sexual violence, as a whole-of-Government response because everyone should be safe in their homes no matter where they are staying or living.

💬 Karen Chhour: Supplementary?

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: I’m going to give the member an extra question. The part on the briefing was not to my satisfaction clearly addressed so the member can have one extra question.

💬 Karen Chhour: Is the Minister aware of any statistics being recorded and compiled on instances of sexual and family violence in emergency and transitional housing?

💬 Hon MARAMA DAVIDSON: It’s an important question and any questions related to housing specifically would need to be raised with the responsible Ministers to discuss in their relevant portfolio capacities. As the Minister for the prevention of family violence and sexual violence, we know that inadequate housing and violence are interrelated issues and we cannot solve one without solving the other. Violence against women is a leading cause of housing insecurity and women are at a substantially increased risk of crime victimisation, including physical and sexual violence.

💬 Karen Chhour: Will she commit to asking the police Minister to ensure statistics of instances of sexual and family violence within emergency and transitional housing are routinely recorded and compiled?

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: In so far as the Minister has responsibility, the Hon Marama Davidson.

💬 Hon MARAMA DAVIDSON: We know we do not yet have all the information we need about this longstanding issue. I receive advice and briefings relevant to my role leading the whole-of-Government response. Reporting of instances of family violence and sexual violence is primarily held by police and is provided in regular updates to me as part of the broader picture of violence across all of Aotearoa. We are working to evolve our understanding of these issues and bring together a collaborative learning system. This will enable us to have better, more robust data. We know right now that for many decades we have not had good data to be able to know the fullest and true extent of the family violence and sexual violence that is happening across homes in Aotearoa New Zealand.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Minister has addressed that question.

💬 Karen Chhour: What action did the Minister take after it was reported that a young woman was referred by Work and Income to accommodation where she, “as the only woman there, felt intimidated by a group of men drinking alcohol outside her bedroom”, and after telling her case manager she felt unsafe was advised to simply spend the day in a local library, just two days before she was raped in her bedroom?

💬 Hon MARAMA DAVIDSON: Firstly, it is an important question and should also be directed to the Ministers with the exact delegation responsibility, particularly for Ministry of Social Development processing issues. Notwithstanding that, as the Minister for the broader prevention responsibility of family violence and sexual violence in Aotearoa, I am aware and know that any instance of violence anywhere that it is happening is not acceptable and is not good enough for any of us in this House to accept. What I am aware of is that I am told by those responsible Ministers’ officers, however, that there are clear communications and standards that have been put in place for all housing and social service providers to ensure that people know when and how to report any instances of violence. What I also know as the Minister for the prevention of family violence and sexual violence is we have work to do to improve the trust and increase the trust that people have across all of our services, including Government and NGO sector, so that people have better faith to be able to put their hand up for help and so that they receive—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Minister has definitely addressed the question.

💬 Karen Chhour: How can she ensure that our vulnerable people in emergency and transitional housing are being kept adequately provided for when there is no recording or collation of relevant data; and what is she doing about it?

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Again, in so far as the Minister has responsibility—I’ve got some doubts about that but the Hon Marama Davidson.

💬 Hon MARAMA DAVIDSON: Well, again, that is an important question and should be directly relayed to the correct ministerial portfolios who are overseeing those areas of Government service. That withstanding, as the Minister for the prevention of family violence and sexual violence, I know that we need to improve all of our data and information systems, our robust reporting systems, and that is an absolute priority under Te Aorerekura, the elimination strategy.

💬 David Seymour: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I hope I can assist. The question was not about the Minister’s responsibility for the provision of data; it was: what action is she taking in her portfolio as Minister, given that data is not available? Now, she didn’t address that question at all.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: I believe she did.

Question No. 12—Justice

12. to the Minister of Justice: How is the Government supporting courts to operate safely during COVID-19?

Kia ora, Mr Speaker. This afternoon, the COVID-19 Response (Courts Safety) Legislation Bill will be read for a third time. The bill clarifies the ability of the judiciary and the Ministry of Justice to set and enforce safety requirements for entering the courts and some tribunals, it enables the judiciary to set safety requirements for selecting and managing juries, it confirms that legislative protections for the public and media to access criminal hearings are satisfied, proceedings are being held remotely, and entry requirements are in place. These changes are temporary, and will ensure the safe operation of our courts while the COVID-19 outbreak continues. The Government has heard the calls from the judiciary and the others working in the sector, so they can manage the COVID-19 risks in their courts.

💬 Vanushi Walters: How have courts been able to operate safely while maintaining the right to justice, and will the courts safety bill help to maintain that?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: Yes, the courts have been incredibly adaptive to the COVID-19 pandemic over the past two years. I thank the judiciary, the Ministry of Justice, and all the other practitioners in our justice system for their innovation, patience, and determination to maintain access to justice. Courts have increased their use of audiovisual links, and put in place several locations, where appropriate, to ensure people’s court hearings can go ahead. The Government has also invested $50 million from the COVID-19 recovery Budget initiative to ensure challenges that have arisen because of COVID are able to be tackled. The bill supports the maintenance of access to justice, as the judiciary and the ministry can only set their requirements where reasonably necessary in the interests of justice, and to respond to COVID-related health and safety risks.

💬 Vanushi Walters: How will the courts safety bill support the judiciary and the Ministry of Justice to continue adapting to COVID-19?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: We want to ensure that the judiciary and the ministry can assess the requirements needed for the courts to implement them on the basis of public health advice. The changes in the bill are not prescriptive—it does not mandate vaccination or any other specific measures. What it does do is give the judiciary the ability to manage their courts safely and according to their judgment as the pandemic continues. The bill gives certainty to the Ministry of Justice and the judiciary that the decisions that they make in keeping their courthouses and rooms safe from COVID have a solid legal backing.