Oral Questions

1. to the Minister of Housing: How many Kāinga Ora homes in new developments would not meet the requirements of the Healthy Homes Standards heating formula, as mentioned in a Cabinet paper released on 3 December 2021, and how much extra funding, if any, would it cost to bring these developments up to the standards required by the heating formula?

All Kāinga Ora new builds will meet the healthy homes standards (HHS). Following the healthy homes standards regulations coming into force on 1 July 2019, issues with the sizing of heaters in apartment-style buildings in builds since 2008 were raised. Kāinga Ora, developers, and property investors raised the issue with officials—in particular, with how it affected new-build apartments. As a consequence of this, we have updated the regulations to make changes to the heating requirements to reflect the higher thermal performance of new homes built to the 2008 building code requirements for insulation and glazing and certain apartments. We consulted with a range of heating and ventilation industry experts, property owners, community housing providers, developers, tenancy advocates, and Kāinga Ora to test the proposed changes. Officials began working on these changes from March 2021. Policy decisions were made on 15 November 2021, and that is the Cabinet paper the member is referring to. The regulations were approved by Cabinet on 7 April of this year. The changes were made public on 14 April of this year, and the law comes into force on 12 May 2022. To assist landlords affected by the recent amendments to the HHS in respect to the heating requirement—i.e., those landlords with new homes built to the 2008 building code requirements for insulation and glazing and those who own certain apartments—they will have until 12 February 2023 to comply with the updated heating standard. In answer to the second part of the question: therefore, no additional funding was required.

Brooke van Velden: Can the Minister guarantee that the Government did not change the healthy homes standards heating formula because it was found that Kāinga Ora’s new developments would not meet the standard and that “The developments would have to be completely redesigned to allow for extra pipework to accommodate a heat pump rather than the wall-panel heaters the engineer recommended.”?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: What I can confirm to the member is that we heard these concerns from a range of developers, a range of builders, a range of landlords, including Kāinga Ora but also community housing providers. I know, as a local constituent MP, I heard it from businesses within my electorate, some of whom are electrical engineers and were involved in the calculations around the capacity needed. So we heard those concerns from a range of areas. We asked Kāinga Ora as our Government development agency to give us some case studies for us to work into our policy making, but this is an example of the Government listening to concerns raised with it and making changes accordingly.

Brooke van Velden: How is it fair or acceptable that the private sector was forced to comply with poorly developed heating standards at great cost, when the Government can simply move the goalposts for Kāinga Ora’s own developments?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I simply don’t accept the argument the member is making there. We made these changes in response to concerns that we heard from private developers; we made these changes in response to concerns that we heard from landlords. This is an example of our Government listening. Yes, it does include Kāinga Ora, but this is about helping all landlords and developers, not just ourselves.

Brooke van Velden: Does the Minister accept that the unnecessary cost that the incorrect heating formula imposed upon landlords will be passed on to tenants who are already struggling to make ends meet in this cost of living crisis?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: In terms of the number of landlords that this would affect, it’s likely to be a very small number. It is homes that were built since 2008 and a subset of apartments; it’s not all buildings. Not all of those rentals would have complied with the standards, because it was not at the threshold of having to. We recognise that, now there are new standards, additional time has been given, and it’s why, in my primary answer, I talked about the time line now stretching out to 2023.

Brooke van Velden: What does she say to landlords who put in place huge heat pumps at large cost to themselves and their tenants, who will feel as though the Government has shifted the goalposts for their own developments and not for landlords who are trying to make a home affordable for New Zealanders?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I’m not sure if the member realises that these changes also apply to private landlords; these changes are not just changes for Kāinga Ora. These are changes to the healthy homes standards that apply across the board.

Question No. 2—Energy and Resources

2. to the Minister of Energy and Resources: What action is the Government taking to decarbonise Auckland’s harbour ferries?

The Government recently announced a $27 million investment for two new fully electric ferries for commuters and sightseers to travel on. Auckland Transport will trial across various major inner- and mid-harbour services once they launch in 2024. The ferries will have a 200-person capacity, space for bikes, a top speed of 25 knots, and a range of 40 kilometres. Two electric fast ferries, and associated wharf infrastructure, will be built in Aotearoa New Zealand by EV Maritime and McMullen and Wing.

💬 Helen White: What will be the impact of this project?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: The current ferries operating in Auckland contribute about 20 percent of Auckland’s public transport emissions. These electric ferries are the beginning of dramatically reducing greenhouse gas emissions, with each ferry displacing approximately a thousand tonnes of carbon emissions annually. This project will also be a major boost to the rapidly developing maritime clean technology sector and further upskill those working in the sector—for example, propulsion control technologies from Wigram-based company HamiltonJet will allow the boats to operate at higher speeds while using less energy. This project is a boost for our climate goals and our economy, which is especially vital as we continue our economic recovery from COVID-19.

💬 Helen White: How is the Government funding enabling this project?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Twenty-seven million dollars of grant funding was committed by central government. This funding will directly cover approximately 75 percent of the costs of constructing the two electric ferries. The remainder is covered by Auckland Transport, but without the Government’s cornerstone investment here, these ferries would not have been in service as quickly as intended.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does the Minister agree that incorporating the Fullers’ Waiheke route into the public transport operating model could help to accelerate decarbonisation efforts?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: That is not a question for the Minister of Energy and Resources.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Point of order, Mr Speaker. This is, of course, related to the fact that Auckland Transport in the Regional Land Transport Plan, the public transport operating model, currently excludes only two routes in the whole of the country that are aligned with regional land transport. It is very—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: So what’s your point—what’s your point of order?

Chlöe Swarbrick: The point of order is that the Minister was involved in negotiating the way that this would be rolled out—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, the answer is that the Minister isn’t responsible.

💬 Chris Bishop: Was the Wellington Electric Boat Building Company, which has just built the Southern Hemisphere’s first electric ferry operating in Wellington, allowed to bid for the contract that the Minister has just announced last week has been awarded in Auckland?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Ministers were not involved in questions of procurement or bidding, as should be the case.

💬 Chris Bishop: Point of order. That doesn’t actually address the question. It just says the Minister’s not responsible for procurement. That’s true, but she is responsible to the House for the procurement decisions of her officials.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: I’ll get you to ask the question again, thank you.

💬 Chris Bishop: Was the Wellington Electric Boat Building Company, which is operating the Southern Hemisphere’s first ever electric ferry right now across Wellington Harbour to Eastbourne, allowed to bid for the contract that the Minister has announced to the tune of $27 million for Auckland?

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: In so far as it relates to the primary question, the Minister may answer.

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Thank you, Mr Speaker. As Ministers are not involved in procurement or bidding, I invite the member to put that question in writing and I’ll happily ask officials to finish the answer.

Question No. 3—Housing (Public Housing)

3. to the Associate Minister of Housing (Public Housing): How many people are on the State housing waitlist now compared to September 2017, and has she received advice on when that number will return to the levels of September 2017?

on behalf of the Associate Minister of Housing (Public Housing): I am proud of this Government’s public housing build programme, the largest of any Government since the 1970s. Since 2017, more than 9,000 new places have been delivered across New Zealand, and 7,300 of these are new builds. The national housing crisis we inherited meant that there simply aren’t enough houses. While we are starting to see progress, we are dealing with the failure of the previous Government to build houses. Not only did the previous Government not build enough houses for the 5,844 people on the waiting-list; they ended up with 1,500 fewer public homes across both Housing New Zealand and the CHPs than they started with. The 2017 wait-list did not reflect the real need, and while it will take some time to repair the carnage wreaked by the previous National Government, we are committed to rolling out our record public housing build programme. If the previous Government had built at the same rate as we are building, there would be over—

💬 Chris Bishop: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I think we’re now up to 45 seconds to a minute of the answer; we are yet to hear anything related to the actual question. It’s a very straight, non-political question, and the House is entitled to expect a concise answer.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: It’s unusual for members to interrupt during the answer to a question, saying that it’s not being answered, when one should probably give the opportunity to hear the answer. But seeing as it’s been raised, I disagree with the member. There are aspects within what the Minister has said which do actually address the first part. It doesn’t completely address it so far, but I look forward to hearing the rest of it.

Thank you. So just where we left off: it will take some time to repair the carnage wreaked by the previous National Government, but we are committed to rolling out our record public housing build programme. If the previous Government had built at the same rate as we are building, there would be over 22,000 more public houses in New Zealand today, accounting for over 80 percent—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: And I should have added—

—of the—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Sorry to interrupt, but I should have added that she should do that a bit quickly.

—OK, I’m just finishing—accounting for over 80 percent of the 26,868 on the current waiting list.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I’m sure that when you review the tapes later this evening—as I know that you do—looking at the answers given by the Minister, you’ll find that there were a number of assertions in that which are very wide of the Standing Orders. Now, if, in fact, your ruling today is that it stands and it’s OK and it’s fine, will that also stand in the mirror Standing Order, which is to do with asking questions, where the Opposition could make all range of those similar sorts of assertions, without any documented proof or otherwise, in a question to a Minister?

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yeah, I do want to acknowledge what the Hon Gerry Brownlee is saying, and I should really have pulled up the Minister. I was listening very carefully for the answer and it took a while, so my advice to the Minister is to get there a lot more quicker, and to the member asking the question to wait for the answer. But I will have a look at it and I will come back and let you know what I think about it.

💬 Chris Bishop: Why did Kāinga Ora build only one net additional State house in the first quarter of 2022?

If we have a look at the builds that Kāinga Ora has done across the 2021-22 financial year, there are 546. But because we are a Government that is committed to an ongoing building and redevelopment programme, we report these figures as net, so we also subtract off there the houses that we demolish to make way for even more public houses that we will be building.

💬 Chris Bishop: Why did she say she was proud of Kāinga Ora’s progress on building, when, in the first quarter of this year, Kāinga Ora built just one net additional State house in New Zealand?

I’m proud of Kāinga Ora’s record on State house building. We have added over 7,000 new-build houses since we have been in Government. We are only beginning to repair some of the carnage wrecked by the previous National Government in the area of housing. But what the member will not understand, because his party fails to understand, is that in order to redevelop and build houses, you have to tear down the ones to redevelop the area.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Before I give the question to Chris Bishop, the number and level of interjections are so much that I barely heard the answer. Interjections about mental health and other things not even related to the question are really out of order.

💬 Matt Doocey: Oh, they’re all areas of failure.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Mr Doocey, you are lucky I was not on my feet.

💬 Chris Bishop: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Did she agree with official advice at the time about the impact of removing interest deductibility on increasing the housing register, and would she accept that that advice has been proved right and she has been proved wrong?

This is a topic that has been traversed many, many, many times in this House. The advice the member is referring to was advice that was given in December of 2020 for Ministers to consider over summer. We considered that advice over summer and, of course, we came back, and what we did is that we said interest deductibility should pertain to new builds. This is why we are seeing a continuation of the building consents that we are seeing. So as a Government, we took means to mitigate that advice.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Is the Minister aware of any examples where Kāinga Ora, previously Housing New Zealand, demolished a whole lot of State houses and then didn’t build on the land where the houses had been demolished, and instead passed that on to private property developers, and under which Government did that happen?

I’m afraid that if I went through the list of examples under the previous Government where that happened, the Speaker would sit me down. [Interruption]

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

Thank you. Can I continue?

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: No. We’ll go on to the—

💬 Chris Bishop: Supplementary?

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Well, you can both sit down. Look, if the member is asking a question and the noise is to the level that I can’t even hear the Minister’s response, then it’s an absolute waste of time even having the question answered.

💬 Chris Bishop: Supplementary?

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: You want another supplementary?

💬 Chris Bishop: Yes please.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: I’d advise members behind you to be quiet.

💬 Chris Bishop: Mr Speaker, thank you. I’ll just say we’re very excited to see you in the Chair, Mr Speaker, and so I just encourage—supplementary. So, in light of that answer to my previous supplementary, is it her position that the removal of interest deductibility does not have an impact on the State house register?

We have gone over this many, many times in this House—that what we are seeing is a continuation of an increase of supply because as a Cabinet we listened to the advice that said that we needed to put in place mitigation around ensuring that we had continuation of supply come on board. My opinion of what contributes far more to the growth of the State house wait-list is that the previous Government ended up with 1,500 fewer public houses than they started with. That includes those held by CHPs and then Housing New Zealand. Not only did they flog them off but they did not build them—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! That’s enough.

💬 Chris Bishop: Isn’t it the case that this Government has now been in office for four and a half years, and it’s about time they stopped blaming the last National Government for the utter ineptitude they have shown on housing that means 4,000 kids are growing up in motels?

What it’s about time is for us to remind New Zealanders that we are a Government that has added over 9,000 public housing places in the time that we have been in Government. I will have put this against the 1,500 fewer than they started with of the previous National Government. Kids have ended up in motels because that party failed New Zealand in housing.

💬 Hon David Parker: Does the Minister blame the last Government for the doubling of the number of houses being built in Auckland under this Government, or is she willing to take credit for this Government?

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, that’s out of order.

Question No. 4—Social Development and Employment

4. to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What recent announcements has she made about Care in the Community?

The Care in the Community model has served us well as we’ve responded to Omicron. Today, I announced a further $58.1 million in funding. This funding will support social service providers and community food organisations in the amazing work they’ve been doing to help people with essential needs. We’ve worked hard to slow the spread of Omicron, and our Government’s response is showing to have paid dividends with a drop in demand for support. Now with higher rates of vaccination coverage, we’re now able to pivot our response and support a broader range of circumstances for people who’ve been significantly impacted by COVID-19 restrictions and requirements.

💬 Glen Bennett: What will today’s announcement provide?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Today’s announcement will provide certainty for many organisations who are supporting our communities as we move through the pandemic. Specifically, we will fund support for ongoing and transitional Care in the Community support, including a pivot in work for Community Connectors, confidence and certainty for community food organisations in the Ministry of Social Development’s Food Secure Communities programme, and funding to support the wellbeing of disabled people.

💬 Glen Bennett: What role will Community Connectors play in the transition plan?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: As caseloads of self-isolating households reduce, Community Connectors will transition towards providing broader support to families impacted by COVID-19. With 500 Community Connectors hosted by 260 providers around the country, the Community Connection Service has been a vital link to support the needs of people self-isolating. The funding announced today will allow this mahi to continue while also enabling connectors to help people with broader COVID-related issues. This could include those with high and complex needs who may need support with employment or educational support. We’ll continue to keep an eye on the ongoing impacts of COVID-19 in our communities and be ready to pivot the Community Connection Service if required for a further Omicron wave or a new variant.

Question No. 5—Social Development and Employment

5. to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Does she stand by all her statements and actions?

Yes, in the context in which they were made.

💬 Hon Louise Upston: Which statement is correct: “Yes, the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) has resumed the use of [work] obligations since June 2020.” or “We don’t just apply sanctions easily.”?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Both of those comments are correct. They are not mutually exclusive, at all.

💬 Hon Louise Upston: Can she explain why sanctions for failing to attend a work appointment in March 2022 were 67 percent lower compared to March 2020?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Because now we have a Ministry of Social Development that has conversations with their clients. They build relationships with their clients. They ascertain what their situations are. It’s led to great results. We’ve seen the largest exits off benefit into employment since electronic records have been kept, and we certainly haven’t reached the peaks of benefit numbers that were originally forecast by Treasury. We stand by our record during the COVID pandemic and we continue to see good results with regards to exits off benefit into employment.

Ricardo Menéndez March: Does the Minister stand by her statement on the Breakfast show on 1 April that there are “still whānau living in hardship”; if so, does she think the Social Security Act’s purpose should aim to end hardship, not just alleviate it?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Yes, I stand by the statement that I made on 1 April, and I will also add that some of the issues that we face, including hardships that whānau are faced with, were issues that we faced pre-pandemic and really have been exacerbated because of the pandemic. I certainly do think that we need to address parts of our welfare system to do things like improve income adequacy, but there are other ways in which we can address hardship and show a Government’s commitment towards reducing poverty. I think the best indication I can see of that was actually this Government making the decision to introduce child poverty reduction legislation in this House. That holds us accountable as a Government.

💬 Hon Louise Upston: Does she stand by her statement yesterday, about reducing the number of long-term job seekers, when significant staff shortages exist, that “This takes time.”; if so, when will numbers on jobseeker benefit longer than a year return to the 2017 levels?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: I watched the House yesterday to see what was asked here—some very good answers given on my behalf. But I will point out that the member who was asking the question was saying that there were 110,000 people on jobseeker who have been on long term. I need to remind that member that about 70,000 to 80,000 of those who are on jobseeker benefit actually have a health condition or disability of some sort. Absolutely there are jobs available at the moment—absolutely. MSD is working hard to get people into those jobs but we do need to recognise that there are a range of New Zealanders that have health conditions or disabilities that make it really hard for them to take up employment. I encourage the member to watch Sunday this coming week, when they interview three people with neurodiverse conditions and they get to talk about why it is so hard for them to be able to gain employment.

💬 Hon Louise Upston: How can the Minister stand by her statement yesterday that “The last thing [we want] is people on benefits for ever and a day.”, when those on the jobseeker benefit long term has increased by 60—six zero—percent under her watch?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: There have been increases in the number of people on benefit in general because of the fact that we have faced a pandemic and a range of things have happened during this time. That means in every category, there are groups of people who have actually gone up. One of the biggest challenges that I think we face—that has been overlooked in the past by previous Governments and not responded to well enough—is actually the issue of supporting people with health conditions and disabilities into employment. Need I remind that member that around 70,000 to 80,000 of those on benefits have a health condition or disability? It’s not necessarily that they don’t want to work; there are a range of barriers in place to them being able to take up employment. A responsible Government invests there and creates a strategy to actually support them to get into employment, and that’s exactly what we’ve done.

💬 Hon Louise Upston: How can the Government claim that Mana in Mahi is reducing benefit dependency, when just 14 percent of participants were on a benefit for longer than a year?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: We’ve gone through the statistics. In fact, with regards to Mana in Mahi, we have outdone what our targets were in terms of the numbers that have been involved in the programme. I think, last time I checked, about 88 percent—I believe; between 86 and 88 percent—actually had either completed or were still on the programme, and a few had left but not gone back on benefit. Given the particular group of people that we are targeting, that’s an amazing outcome and it shows that it’s an effective programme.

💬 Hon Louise Upston: Point of order. Thank you, Mr Speaker. That was an interesting answer, but it didn’t focus on—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: That’s not a point of order; that’s a comment.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Point of order. I’m sure my colleague was going to point out to you that the Minister had not addressed the question, and you cut her off extremely quickly.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: She did not; she made a comment. She was giving a commentary on the answer. That is not a point of order.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Point of order. I’ll raise the point. The question was not addressed. It was about the number of people going into Mana in Mahi, not the number of people coming off it.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: And if that had have been asked at that time, I would have considered it at that time. I will consider it now and tell you that it was addressed.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Does she agree with the assertion that a programme designed to stop people becoming long-term beneficiaries and keep them off benefits and in work is a failure if it succeeds in doing just that?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: I’m not even quite sure what that Minister was asking. However, I think I agree. [Interruption]

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

Question No. 6—Māori Development

6. to the Minister for Māori Development: What reports has he seen on education and employment outcomes for rangatahi Māori?

Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker. Kia ora tātou. I’ve received an update on Pae Aronui, delivered through Te Puni Kōkiri. Pae Aronui trials innovative methods to grow the confidence, capability, and connectedness of rangatahi—of young people. They’re some of our most disconnected young people, who come from some incredibly tough backgrounds. In fact, I’ve had some of the Opposition members join me to see the success we’ve had on some of these courses. I’m pleased to share with the House that of the 275 young people in year two, 94 percent have successfully completed the programme. So far in year three, of the 200 young people engaged, 89 have already gained employment, and 47 have re-engaged with education. I’m incredibly proud of our young people and providers in our Pae Aronui programmes—a number of them Pākehā providers too, and I give a lot of credit to them in terms of putting their hands up and working with this really tough group of people.

💬 Arena Williams: How is Pae Aronui different to other targeted youth programmes?

💬 Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Pae Aronui providers often provide services for whānau as part of the response and have always focused on ongoing pastoral support for the rangatahi concerned. Providers incorporate tikanga Māori; te reo Māori, our Māori language; cultural identity; and mātauranga Māori within their Pae Aronui programmes. This reflects community needs and supports a by Māori, for Māori, tikanga design approach to the programme as a whole. I have seen gang members shift incredibly, believe it or not, after going through the programme—sometimes not long programmes—but so proud that they have got something to show and something to look forward—

💬 Hon Member: How many, Willie?

💬 Hon WILLIE JACKSON: —to after six to eight weeks. Ask the question and you’ll get the answer.

💬 Arena Williams: How do programmes like Pae Aronui support rangatahi Māori?

💬 Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Iwi-based programmes and those taking a whānau-centred and kaupapa Māori approach is how they deliver the programme. They’re helping young people connect to their culture, which is helping to build resilience and confidence. Māori providers innately take a holistic approach, which is helping reach beyond young people to their peers and whānau members as well, who are seeing and wanting to emulate their success. Pākehā providers are working in tandem with a lot of Māori in the communities. I salute those Pākehā providers—because that’s what it’s all about, partnership and working together so that we can uplift some of our young people in some of our communities.

💬 Hon Nanaia Mahuta: Can the Minister advise what the Opposition might learn from Pae Aronui?

💬 Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Mr Speaker?

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, sit down. That’s out of order. The Minister’s not responsible for that.

Question No. 7—Police

7. to the Minister of Police: Does she stand by her statement, “I reject the premise that gang tensions have increased under this Government’s watch”?

on behalf of the Minister of Police: I stand by the full context of my full statement, which was since the arrival of the 501s in 2015, the nature of gangs has fundamentally changed, making them much more overt and sophisticated. When this Government took office two years later, we got to work giving the police the tools they need to deal with these threats. We have more police than any other Government in this country’s history, we’ve banned assault weapons and introduced firearm protection orders, we’ve introduced legislation to hit organised criminals where it hurts—their pockets—so they don’t benefit from dirty money, and we’re running the resilience to organised crime programme to work with communities to address the harms and drivers of organised crime.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Is Operation Cobalt an admission from the Government that gang violence is out of control?

No; it’s an admission from this Government that the extra resourcing that we put into policing allows us to make sure that we tackle gang issues.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Why has the Government waited so long to take enforcement action against gangs, and announced a task force similar to Strike Force Raptor, an idea the Government mocked three years ago?

I acknowledge the departure of the former member for Tauranga, Simon Bridges, who was the original author of Strike Force Raptor. The Government didn’t, obviously, take up the offer from the Opposition to take up that. What we like to do is make sure we’re resourcing the police properly. That has been seen through the success of Operation Tauwhiro and also, as the member points out, the police action that will take place under Operation Cobalt. This Government has resourced the police properly, which has ensured that we’ve got 1,400 more police. Because of the parliamentary system, I’m able to be here as Minister of Police answering this question, and also to be at the Royal New Zealand Police College in the great city of Porirua, to welcome the graduates of Wing 353—71 more recruits for our front line.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: If this Government has resourced the police properly, why are we seeing such a massive increase in gang violence?

Well, I think the member should have listened to the answer to the first question around the issues that have come about since the gang 501s have arrived. I’d also point out that while this Government has increased police resourcing in the 4½ years that we’ve been in power, between 2013 and 2014 I believe that police numbers on the front line dropped 300. Our Government is committed to making sure we back the front line, as opposed to the previous National Government that talked a big game and let numbers go down.

💬 Hon Stuart Nash: Is the Minister aware of any party in this House that voted against this Government’s legislation that legislated for greater penalties for gun crime?

I do—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Minister is not responsible for how the parties vote.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Have gang tensions increased or decreased under this Government?

I think what is important is if communities do have concerns about gang tensions in their community, that the Government is making sure we are resourcing police to tackle it. We’ve talked about Operation Tauwhiro. I’d also like to—

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Point of order, Mr Speaker. It was a very clear, short, and concise question and the—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: And he hadn’t even answered it, so it’d be really helpful to hear the—

Anahila Kanongata‘a-Suisuiki: Listen up.

💬 Kieran McAnulty: Start again.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: As I was saying, it would be really helpful to hear the whole answer and then I can make a judgment on that.

Before I was interrupted, I was just going to refer to Operation Weirton which took place earlier this year, which took 600 kilograms of meth off our streets; took $7 million dollars of assets, of which $1 million was in one single bank account; and undertook several arrests. Again, because we’ve got resourcing, we’re making sure we’re tackling organised crime.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Can I ask that question again, please? He hasn’t answered it. It was a very short and concise question.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yes, and it’s been addressed. If you have supplementaries to use, then absolutely you can ask it again.

💬 Dr Duncan Webb: In respect of police resourcing of gangs, does the Minister think the 71 new officers graduating at 2 p.m. today will be of assistance there, and is he aware of any other graduates in the past period of this Government?

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: In so far as it relates to the primary question, the Minister can answer.

Well, there are obviously 1,400 over the last 4½ years, which we’re extremely proud of, and, obviously, the Minister is representing the Government at the graduation today. We’d like to congratulate the 71 new members of the constabulary who will be joining the front line soon.

Question No. 8—COVID-19 Response

8. to the Minister for COVID-19 Response: Does he remain committed to ensuring that the Government’s response to COVID-19 is informed by the best available scientific evidence; if so, what is his response to an open letter by more than 150 doctors and scientists calling for additional protections, particularly in schools?

Yes, this Government absolutely remains committed to a science- and evidence-based approach to dealing with COVID-19. As much as we’d all like it to be the case, the pandemic is not over and we cannot afford to take our foot off the pedal as we head into winter. That’s why the Government has implemented a protection and minimisation strategy, following the advice from Professor David Skegg and the Strategic COVID-19 Public Health Advisory Group. Our response has, and will continue to, focus on protecting those groups that are the most vulnerable and to stay agile and be ready to adjust to change as the outbreak continues to evolve as it will. This will mean a continued push for higher vaccination rates and the further promotion of public health measures that allow people to protect themselves and their loved ones. The hard work and sacrifices of New Zealanders have supported the Government’s strategy and delivered one of the lowest rates of cases in deaths in the OECD, and now is not the time to change that approach.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: Does he agree with these experts that “COVID-19 spreads predominantly by airborne transmission, therefore, to minimise infections public health policies must aim to provide clean air within indoor environments.”, and, if so, why isn’t this Government requiring higher standards of ventilation and air purification, including in schools?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: In answer to the first part of the question, yes. In answer to the last part of the member’s question, we’ve looked very closely at ventilation within schools in terms of what is the most effective way of delivering good ventilation in schools. And artificial ventilation systems—so, air cleaners—don’t replenish the air as frequently as opening the windows even a small amount.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: What advice has he received, if any, on the role of masks in reducing school transmission, and does this suggest that the Government should be providing N19, N95, or equivalent masks to schools and mandating mask-use over winter?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: It very much depends on the context of the school environment in question. Yes, masks still continue to play a useful role in schools. Schools determine their own approaches around mask-use depending on the particular risks that they are confronting and relevant to their particular circumstances. They have our full support where they decide that mask-use should still be required. And we are continuing, and we have, to provide to schools masks to make sure that cost is not a barrier.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: What steps, if any, has he taken to increase COVID-19 vaccination among tamariki Māori, such as working alongside community providers or rolling out vaccinations at schools?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Increasing our tamariki vaccination rates remains a priority. We continue to work alongside local providers to make sure that vaccinations continue to roll out. We do have to acknowledge that vaccination rates amongst the youngest age cohort who are eligible—the five- to 11-year-olds—continues to be low. One of the reasons that we are hearing that second dosage, or the rates of second dosing, are lagging behind first doses is that a number of those children have subsequently had COVID-19 and therefore have to wait three months before they can get their second doses. There will be some who haven’t yet had a first dose for the same reason; although that seems to be less of a factor in the first doses. We all have a challenge to ensure that we get our first dose rates up amongst that age cohort. Ultimately, it’s a parent’s decision, and we should all be enforcing the positive messages around the value of vaccination to the parents so that they have confidence in taking up that option.

Question No. 9—Education

9. to the Associate Minister of Education: What recent announcements has the Government made about supporting regular attendance and engagement in education?

On Sunday, the Minister of Education, the Hon Chris Hipkins, and I made a pre-Budget announcement of $88 million of targeted funding for attendance and engagement programmes to ensure our tamariki are in education. Over the past two years, we have been investing in evidence-based attendance initiatives that are led by schools and communities who know their students best. This latest package is providing further funding for these initiatives, which, prior to 2017, had been under-invested in. Attendance rates need to improve across all ages, deciles, and regions. They have been declining since 2015 and COVID-19 has added more challenges. Budget 2022 provides system-level and targeted investment to make the education system a place where learners want to be and where they can get the targeted support they need, ensuring there are routes back into learning for those learners who are disengaged.

💬 Marja Lubeck: What approach is the Government taking to support students to attend school regularly?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: When changes were made to the attendance service in 2013, the work of engaging students in education was taken away from schools and communities who know their students best. The Government is redesigning the attendance service to bring that provision closer to schools. That work is happening now and has been rolled out in some regions already. We are also taking a prevention approach to students who are starting to show signs of poor attendance—for example, the Positive Behaviour for Learning suite is a proven programme, which has been in place since 2011, that fosters safe, inclusive environments, particularly for ākonga and whānau Māori. Now, the refresh programme is based on the latest research. It empowers schools with practical solutions to—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yeah, I think the Minister’s definitely addressed the question.

💬 Erica Stanford: Can she confirm that 8,000 children were not enrolled in any school in March 2022, twice as many as at the start of 2019, and, if so, why has she waited so long to do anything about it while we face a truancy crisis that has exploded under this Government?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: I’d really like to thank the member for that question, because it is important that they understand why we take an evidence-based approach and plan this so carefully, because it can go terribly wrong if you don’t. In 2013, when the previous National Government took a non - evidence-based approach and developed an attendance system that took it away from schools, we saw attendance falling dramatically. That is not the approach that this Government will take.

💬 Marja Lubeck: What does this funding mean for schools, students, and families?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: This funding is targeted for our most vulnerable, but will be of benefit to all schools. For students with learning support needs, we will have increased resourcing with the Incredible Years programme to support caregivers, whānau, and school and early childhood educators to improve communication skills and emotional regulation. Targeted funding has been carved out for our Māori ākonga and Pacific students at risk of disengaging and schools will be better supported to identify and support their students to attend school in engaging and learning.

Question No. 10—Education

10. to the Minister of Education: What, if any, is the net financial deficit of Te Pūkenga forecast for 2022, and how much more or less is it than the actual Institutes of Technology and Polytechnics sector deficit in 2019 prior to the establishment of Te Pūkenga?

Before we commenced the reforms of vocational education that brought the 16 existing polytechs and institutes of technology together under the Te Pūkenga umbrella, a range of potential deficits for the sector without reform were projected. The highest of these was $156 million in 2022. I am advised that Te Pūkenga group is currently forecasting a deficit of $110 million for 2022, consistent with the mid-range of those earlier projections. Forecasts must, of course, however, be treated with caution. In 2021, last year, Te Pūkenga forecast a deficit of $46 million but actually delivered a small surplus. In 2019, the sector produced a deficit of $49 million.

💬 Penny Simmonds: Does he consider that a deficit of $110 million—approximately $60 million more than prior to his mega merger, when the deficit was $48 million—means the sector is better or worse financially?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I don’t believe it’s an acceptable level of deficit, and that’s the reason that we are reforming the sector, because the range of projections going into the reform programme could have been significantly worse if we had not undertaken reform.

💬 Penny Simmonds: What concerns, if any, have the Tertiary Education Commission (TEC) expressed to the Minister regarding Te Pūkenga not meeting the expectations he outlined to Te Pūkenga in July 2020 to “improve efficiency and effectiveness”?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: It’d be fair to say the Tertiary Education Commission have been giving a range of quite frank advice on the Te Pūkenga change process. It is a work in progress. Based on the TEC advice, the board of Te Pūkenga commissioned some independent expertise as well, to review their change processes so far, that have made some quite robust recommendations about that. It is still a work in progress. There is still a lot more that needs to be done. I still have confidence in Te Pūkenga undertaking that change process, but it is a complex programme of change and it does have risk associated with it.

💬 Penny Simmonds: What is his response to the report produced by the Auditor-General that notes “It is important that Te Pūkenga address the underlying problems with financial viability within its network. The lack of a detailed plan about how it will do this is concerning.”?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I agree with the Auditor-General, and similar concerns have been raised by the Tertiary Education Commission. Te Pūkenga has only been in existence for a relatively short period of time, and they have inherited a sector that was in a great deal of difficulty. So we do have to give them time and support to make sure they are getting to the bottom of the structural problems that they inherited from the 16 component organisations that make up Te Pūkenga to make sure we get the sector back into a viable state. I would note that they continue to deliver educational outcomes for their learners whilst they are undertaking this reform programme. In fact, there are some very good indicators there, including the fact that the number of people engaged in work-based learning, which now also comes under the Te Pūkenga umbrella, has been continuing to increase, including a 50 percent increase in the number of building and construction apprentices, for example.

💬 Penny Simmonds: Does the Minister think the public of New Zealand will consider the $120 million of taxpayer money spent on merging polytechnics into Te Pūkenga has been well spent when Te Pūkenga has made the institutes of technology and polytechnics (ITP) sector less financially viable?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I absolutely reject the premise of the member’s question, and, if she’d listened to my primary answer, she would know that the assertion in her own question is wrong. In fact, the deficits were being forecast before the reform programme was undertaken. There are transitional deficits as this reform programme is being undertaken, as were projected when the reform programme was announced and started. We do expect that we will see the delivery of a significantly better sector, but that is going to take some time. It is a complex programme.

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: Does the Minister recall the number of times he went to the Minister of Finance when he first became the Minister responsible for the ITP sector to have to bail out polytechnics because they were going under?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Yes, in fact, I do. Over $90 million had to be put into the existing institutes of technology and polytechs within the first couple of years that we were in Government just to keep the lights on, and the forecasts were indicating that that would run into the hundreds of millions of dollars if a reform was not undertaken.

Question No. 11—Transport

11. to the Minister of Transport: What recent announcements has he made about supporting greater access to driver licence testing and training?

Yesterday, I joined my colleague the Minister for Social Development and Employment, the Hon Carmel Sepuloni, to announce support to help 64,000 New Zealanders access driver licence testing and training. Having a driver licence is a key requirement for up to 70 percent of jobs, yet a big portion of our community can’t access training or tests due to costs or other barriers such as location. Evidence shows that getting a driver’s licence is an important step in obtaining employment, staying out of the justice system, and staying safe on our roads. This $86.5 million investment from Budget 2022 will have tangible results for people progressing through the driver licensing system and broader social and economic benefits for Aotearoa New Zealand.

💬 Greg O’Connor: How does this scheme make it easier for people to get drivers’ licences?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: This investment will provide targeted support for people to progress through the drivers’ licensing system by providing access to high-quality lessons to ensure that drivers are ready for the road. We are improving access to testing through initiatives, such as partnering with communities and increasing driver testing officers’ capabilities and capacity to meet the needs of communities. Waka Kotahi will also provide mobile testing options for learner theory tests so that community members can access testing in locations such as community centres, marae, and schools in remote and rural communities.

💬 Greg O’Connor: What, if any, are the flow-on benefits of ensuring people have access to drivers’ licences?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: There are many. Drivers who remain engaged within the licensing system and progress to their full licence have been shown to have improved road safety outcomes. It stands to reason, therefore, that greater access and support for individuals learning to drive will result in lower rates of serious injuries and deaths on our roads—a key focus of our Government’s Road to Zero programme. Removing the barriers to driver licence training also helps to prevent fines, court, and the risk of criminal penalties, providing pathways to work for those that otherwise might face barriers, and, in doing so, unlocking social, economic, and productivity benefits right across our economy and society.

💬 Simeon Brown: Is the Minister aware that the average wait time to sit a restricted driver’s licence test has doubled between 2018 and 2019, and doubled again between 2019 and 2022; if so, what is the Minister’s target for wait times to sit a restricted driver’s licence test?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: I think that the member and most reasonable people would understand that the experience of COVID over the past couple of years has resulted in an increase in waiting times. Those are starting to come down in regions where resource has been applied, and this Government is putting an additional $86.5 million through this package to make sure that people have access to these services and that waiting times are acceptable and reasonable to support communities. I would note that initiatives like this would not be possible with great swingeing tax cuts for the wealthiest New Zealanders. We’re investing in New Zealanders and access to the services they need.

💬 Simeon Brown: Is the Government still committed to five free driver’s licence lessons for young people at secondary school, or is this just another broken promise?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: As per the announcement that the Minister for Social Development and Employment and I have made, we are providing, through this announcement—as we’re discussing in this question—targeted support for those drivers’ licensing candidates and communities who need the support within our system. That’s what this $86.5 million investment will make. It will help over 64,000 people who might otherwise not get their driver licence to get one. That’s a good outcome.

💬 Kieran McAnulty: How will this scheme specifically benefit those in rural areas?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: I have received very active representation from Government MPs in rural electorates around this issue who do want to see there be better access to driver licence testing and training in their areas. This scheme will help by providing much more flexibility and resource for Waka Kotahi and the Ministry of Social Development to work with providers in those areas and to do innovative things like set up theory testing in community halls, marae, and schools by setting up block booking in areas. We know, in many of these rural areas, the current model doesn’t necessarily meet the fiscal bottom line, but we don’t want to leave those communities in the lurch. So this additional resourcing will enable us to do things like setting up block booking for people in those areas so that service providers can come in, take bookings, and get those young people into licences. This is going to be very good for rural New Zealand.

Question No. 12—Corrections

12. to the Minister of Corrections: Is he confident in the performance of Corrections; if so, how does he explain a 29 percent increase in prisoner-on-staff assaults from November 2021 to February 2022, despite there being a decrease in sentenced prisoners?

Yes, I support the work of Corrections. While no violence is acceptable, the demographic of the prison population has changed over the last few years, with higher proportions of gang members, higher proportions of people with convictions for violence, and increased numbers of people with mental health and drug and alcohol issues. This is having an impact on violence in prison. Corrections now encourage reporting of any inappropriate behaviour regardless of how minor, whereas previous Governments did not. It is important that even minor behaviour is no longer ignored. Reducing violence and aggression is a priority and I’ve told Corrections to undertake priority work to try and turn these numbers around.

💬 Toni Severin: What would the Minister say to a Corrections Association of New Zealand spokesperson who said to me, “The Minister signed off on a five-point action plan on 12 May 2021. To date, it has had zero effect and we call it the five-point inaction plan.”?

💬 Hon KELVIN DAVIS: I’d encourage that person to continue working with their unions and with Corrections to address the issues that we’re concerned about. As I said, no aggression and violence in prisons is acceptable.

💬 Toni Severin: Why has the annual number of reconvictions for individuals serving electronic monitoring sentences for violence charges increased by over 33 percent between 2017 and 2021?

💬 Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Mr Speaker, can I just clarify. Is she talking about people in prison or not?

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Can you—

💬 Toni Severin: It’s to do with—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, I’ll get you to ask the question again, and be very clear.

Why has the annual number of reconvictions for individuals serving an electronic monitoring sentence for a violence charge increased by over 33 percent between 2017 and 2021?

💬 Hon KELVIN DAVIS: I dispute those numbers. Rehabilitation and reimprisonment rates have actually gone down under this Government. It’s a bit unclear, really, where she was heading because there was so much to that question, but you can see in the annual report for Corrections that rehabilitation and reimprisonment rates have actually decreased.