Oral Questions

1. to the Minister for Disability Issues: Talofa lava, Mr Speaker. How is the Government delivering change for disabled people through Budget 2022?

Malo le soifua, Mr Speaker. Budget 2022 demonstrates the Government’s continuing commitment to deliver change for the disability community by investing over $1 billion as we continue along the journey of reforming the health and disability system. Funding for disabled people in Budget 2022 includes $107.8 million to establish the new Ministry for Disabled People, $100 million for the implementation of the Enabling Good Lives approach, $735 million for Disability Support Services, $12 million to strengthen New Zealand Sign Language and education, and, additionally, funding into community-based services for disabled people and family careers.

💬 Angie Warren-Clark: How have disabled people helped to inform these significant changes?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Disabled people, tangata whaikaha Māori, tagata sa’ilimalo, their whānau and aiga have been involved in the development of the Enabling Good Lives approach from its beginnings in 2010. Disabled people and tangata whaikaha Māori also make up two-thirds of the governance group establishing the new ministry. These involvements give a particularly powerful and practical demonstration of the internationally recognised motto of the disability rights movement, “Nothing about us without us.”, which seeks to ensure that disabled people can meaningfully impact change on areas important to them.

💬 Angie Warren-Clark: Why are these changes important?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Approximately one in four New Zealanders identify as having a disability. That’s 1.4 million New Zealanders. Disabled people face accessibility barriers across a number of areas of society. They’re disproportionately represented in poverty statistics and experience heightened levels of discrimination. These changes will help to ensure disabled people have more personalised services, greater opportunities to choose how they live a good life, and improved outcomes across employment, education, health, and wellbeing. More broadly, Aotearoa New Zealand, as a whole, benefits from better inclusion of disabled people in society, including from enormous untapped skills that could add further value to New Zealand in a myriad of ways.

Question No. 2—Housing

2. to the Minister of Housing: Does she stand by her statements that “KiwiBuild is alive and well” and that “Since Labour took office at the end of 2017, it’s been one of our government’s top priorities to fix the housing crisis”?

I stand by the full statement: “Since Labour took office at the end of 2017, it’s been one of our government’s top priorities to fix the housing crisis we inherited. We’re making good progress, but the problems caused by decades of under-investment in housing infrastructure, National’s gutting of public housing and failure to build more, and no action on growing affordable housing, was never going to be fixed in a few years. The reality is it’s going to take more time.” In regards to KiwiBuild: yes. So far, 1,365 KiwiBuild homes have been built for Kiwi families and another 856 are currently under construction. I note that the previous National Government delivered over a hundred affordable homes in nine years through the special housing areas. I also note that the statements come from a column I wrote correcting inaccurate comments about the Budget—errors the member himself replicated in written parliamentary questions this week.

💬 Chris Bishop: If KiwiBuild is “alive and well” after just 1,365 homes have been built after four years, what would she define as seriously unwell, verging on dead?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: One hundred affordable homes over nine years by the previous National Government.

💬 Chris Bishop: Has she seen the statement in 2012 by Labour Party candidate Megan Woods: “National are talking negative on kiwibuild. This crowd would’ve told Mickey Savage that he couldn’t do it … well he did and so will we”, and doesn’t reaching just 1.3 percent of the original KiwiBuild target show that this Government has failed?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Although I have no ministerial responsibility for Labour candidate Megan Woods, I do put our record of 1,300 families living in affordable homes over 4½ years against the 100 National delivered over nine long years, any day of the week.

💬 Chris Bishop: Why has the Government removed or sold more State houses than it has built this financial year?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I’m very pleased the member asked this question. In order for us to do the once-in-a-generation build of State houses that we are doing, we are redeveloping the suburbs that we own. We have added over 9,000 new public housing places since we took office: 7,000 of those are new builds—and these are net numbers. If we look at the gross number of houses that have been added in 4½ years, it is over 13,000. I put that against the record of the National Party in Government, who finished office with 1,500 fewer houses than they started with because they’d flogged them off.

💬 Chris Bishop: Why, after four years of so-called State house - built growth, is the Government demolishing or selling more State homes in this year than it is building, and when is she going to take some accountability for four years of failure?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I realise that member comes from a party where they need a 101 on how to build State houses, but in order to intensify on areas that you own, you do demolish houses. You build back more—that is exactly what our Government is doing. We have made a commitment to build 18,000 new State houses by 2024, and this is more than any Government since the 1970s. The member is wrong.

💬 Chris Bishop: Why has the State house waiting list blown out to 27,000 people, a quintupling of the wait-list number since Labour came into office; and when will it return to the level it was in 2017 or—better yet—zero?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: The reason why we are seeing the State house wait-list grow is because we do not have enough State houses, because, when in office, National not only failed to build State houses; they sold off State houses and—as I said in a previous answer—ended up with 1,500 fewer than they started with. If National had built at the rate that we have and not flogged off our State houses, we would have nearly 20,000 more State houses than we have today. When will we get to the end of that—when will we cure the waiting list? When we make up for the damage that National did in Government.

Question No. 3—Health

3. to the Minister of Health: Talofa, Mr Speaker. What recent announcements has he made about the Government’s response to the independent review of Pharmac?

Yesterday, the final report of the independent review of Pharmac was released and I announced the Government’s response to it. Our drug-buying system was set up nearly three decades ago and has delivered good benefits to New Zealanders. However, in the face of complaints about aspects of the decision-making approaches, it was appropriate to review the agency. I confirm that the Government has accepted most of the 33 recommended actions made by the independent panel, either in whole or in part.

💬 Dr Tracey McLellan: How is the Government responding to the recommendations made in the report?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: Many of the 33 recommendations deal with the need for Pharmac to improve its equity performance, and others deal with its decision-making processes. I’m confident that the Pae Ora (Healthy Futures) Bill, once enacted, will, by bringing Pharmac under the health sector principles, significantly improve Pharmac’s ability to achieve more equitable outcomes. Also, by collaborating more with other parts of the health administration and engaging more strongly with health consumers, Pharmac’s decision-making will improve.

💬 Dr Tracey McLellan: What changes will New Zealanders see from the Government’s response to those recommendations made in the report?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: The Government is requiring Pharmac to engage more with health consumer voices and to more actively collaborate and coordinate with other parts of the health administration. In some cases, the Ministry of Health will play its stewardship role—for example, in the development of vaccination and rare disorder strategies. Pharmac will have a critical role to play in these strategies, but it will not be an exclusive role—the days of the “Independent Republic of Pharmac” are over. Pharmac’s purpose will be to secure the best possible procurement outcomes to achieve all of the objectives set by any strategy.

Question No. 4—Foreign Affairs

4. to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: Does she stand by all her statements and actions with regard to New Zealand’s relationships with Pacific Island countries, and China’s moves to build a closer China - Pacific Island countries community?

Yes. In particular, I stand by the statement I made where I said that we were continuing to build on our already deep relationship with the Pacific. Further to that, I’m particularly proud of the 1.34 million COVID-19 vaccine doses and the $325 million in additional Budget support to support Pacific countries through the pandemic. I stand by the $1.3 billion climate finance package, of which at least half will be going to the Pacific to support climate change adaptation. I also stand by the increase to our overall aid to the Pacific for this triennium by 45 percent, compared to the previous three years. These actions show our enduring commitment to the Pacific.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Does she stand by her statement that the Government, in regards to the Pacific engagement, doesn’t “need to act in a way that makes us look desperate”, and, if so, does she believe the Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong, with her two visits to the Pacific region in the same number of weeks, is desperate?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: The member misquotes what I said. In fact, the quote about desperation was in response to the Opposition members thinking that we weren’t doing enough.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Does she agree that her desire—as she puts it—not to look desperate has led to what she earlier described as a “relationship failure” between New Zealand and Pacific Island countries like the Solomons?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Again, I just want to clarify the reference to desperation. It seems as if the Opposition, by the way that they are talking down the relationship with the Pacific, are wanting us to act in a very desperate way. We do not need to, because we have a long and enduring partnership with the Pacific. We value our Pacific partners. We are showing and demonstrating that we are working with them towards Pacific-led solutions.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Notwithstanding the Minister’s attempt to re-characterise what she’s said, the comments were made in relation to the decision by Australia to see things as being urgent enough for the Foreign Minister to very quickly get into the Pacific to talk to counterpart leaders. That question wasn’t addressed by the Minister.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: I disagree. I listened very carefully to both the question and the response from the Minister. She actually did address the question that the member has asked. It’s up to the member to take the answer and ask further supplementaries, if he wishes to.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Does she stand by her statement regarding New Zealand’s engagement with the Pacific that “We don’t have to rush into these things because the foundation of our relationship with the Pacific is very strong.”, and, if so, how does she square that with her earlier statement that the relationship failure between New Zealand and countries like the Solomon Islands has led to engagement with China?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Yes, I do stand by my statement, and, in relation to the security arrangements and China, I made the clear comment that it may not be a necessary set of arrangements if Pacific Island nations look to each other to ensure that their security needs are being addressed.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Does she think, having made only one visit to the Pacific in 18 months, that she’s pretty much nailed her desire not to look desperate about what is seen as potentially the largest geopolitical shift in our region in our lifetimes?

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Notwithstanding the irony, the Minister can answer the part of the question within her responsibilities.

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: I’m really disappointed that the Opposition continues to talk down the important relationship that we have with the Pacific, because I have indicated that I will be attending the Pacific Islands Forum in person. As soon as borders opened in Fiji, I went there, Minister Henare went there, and Minister Sio is currently there. We continue to engage with the Pacific on virtual platforms. I met with the Deputy Prime Minister of Tuvalu when he was here, and also the Prime Minister of Cook Islands when he was here and the Foreign Minister of Tonga when she was here, as have other ministerial colleagues who have met with a range of ministerial counterparts from the Pacific. I’m disappointed that that member continues to choose to talk down the important relationship that we have with the Pacific. It is valued. It is important. We continue to engage in our enduring relationship with Pacific nations.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: We come to question No. 5, in the name of Shanan Halbert—oh, sorry.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Supplementary.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: OK, we’ll go back. Sorry, I did not see you stand up. So supplementary, the Hon Gerry Brownlee.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Do you know what, Mr Speaker? If you didn’t see me standing, I wish the world all had eyes like yours.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Well, I think it was code for “I don’t think you did stand up.”

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Well, I was being generous—we both wear glasses. To the Minister: is she telling us that there is no more work for New Zealand to do as an immediate response to what is now a second proposal put to the 10 countries that China has diplomatic relations with in the Pacific?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: I am saying that New Zealand’s relationship with the Pacific is important, and the agreements and arrangements that we make with the Pacific are critically important in order to support them to address the most important issue, climate change, and then economic resilience. Those are the conversations that we are having. Our foreign policy is not defined by any other country except ourselves.

Question No. 5—Economic and Regional Development

5. to the Minister for Economic and Regional Development: Fa‘afetai tele lava, Mr Speaker. What announcements has he made on transforming the advanced manufacturing sector?

Talofa lava, Mr Speaker. Yesterday, I launched the draft industry transformation plan for advanced manufacturing.

💬 Hon Dr Megan Woods: Good work.

💬 Hon STUART NASH: Thank you. Public consultation will run until 13 July. I would like to thank Brett O’Riley from the Employers and Manufacturers Association and Rachel Mackintosh from E tū union for their leadership in getting this plan ready for consultation. Advanced manufacturing is one of eight industries identified by the Government with significant potential for transformational change. Consistent with all industry transformation plans, the draft plan for advanced manufacturing was developed in partnership with businesses, workers, Māori, and wider stakeholders. It provides an overview of New Zealand’s advanced manufacturing sector and outlines a series of potential actions to accelerate its growth and innovation.

💬 Shanan Halbert: Why was advanced manufacturing identified for an industry transformation plan?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: Advanced manufacturing is vitally important for New Zealand. It is a broad, diverse sector and a major contributor to the economy, jobs, and our communities. However, we must lift labour productivity and capital intensity if we are to ensure a sustainable, profitable, and globally competitive advanced manufacturing sector going forward. Two trends provide an opportunity to accelerate the growth and transformation of the sector over the next 20 years. First, the sector was undergoing a fundamental shift through the application of advanced technologies and processes; and secondly, more focus than ever is being placed on economic activity that is high wage, circular, and low emissions.

💬 Shanan Halbert: Has the Government allocated any funding to this transformation plan in Budget 2022?

💬 Hon David Bennett: This is going to be good.

💬 Hon STUART NASH: Budget 2022—and it is good, indeed, Mr Bennett—showed that the Government is committed to a high wage, low-emissions economy, with economic security for all in good times and bad. Industry transformation plans are a key part of this strategy. Budget 2022 committed a further $148 million to industry transformation plans, building on the funding allocation in previous Budgets. Thirty million dollars were set aside for advanced manufacturing to be drawn down when the transformation plan is finalised and particular areas for Government investment are identified.

Question No. 6—Immigration

6. to the Minister of Immigration: Does he agree with the Productivity Commission’s finding that the immigration system “does not undergo the same level of transparency, public scrutiny and robust policy assessment that most other public policies require”, and how can he be confident that his Government’s immigration rebalance will alleviate workforce shortages?

Talofa lava, Mr Speaker. In answer to the first question, no. A year ago this Government set out our intention to make immigration systems smarter and simpler, and that is what we have done through the immigration rebalance. I’m confident about the rebalance because the Accredited Employer Work Visa combines six visa categories into one and will have simple criteria and shorter processing times. The Green List provides clear and accelerated pathways to residence for more skilled workers. The median wage threshold protects against migrant exploitation and creates the right incentives for employers to transition away from reliance on low skilled, low-wage migrant workers. And sector agreements will help the sectors particularly reliant on migrant workers to transition to these new settings. The Government has been very open about our intention to move to a higher skilled and higher-wage workforce, and that is what we are delivering.

💬 Dr James McDowall: Does the Minister believe that nurses are less valuable to New Zealand than multimedia specialists, given he gave multimedia specialists a fast track to residence but is making nurses wait two years?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: The Green List, as the member refers to, was made up by skills that are in high demand in New Zealand. I know that the Minister of Health has talked about the shortage of nurses recently, and when we’re wanting to attract nurses to New Zealand, we actually want them to nurse. We have given more categories of nurses a streamlined pathway to residence, which is better than pre-COVID and under the previous Government.

💬 Dr James McDowall: Point of order, Mr Speaker. The question very specifically asked, does he believe that nurses are less valuable, and I don’t think he addressed that.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Well, I think he did. A member shouldn’t actually expect “Yes”, “No”, or an explicit answer. He can, by making the statement that he did, actually address the question, which he did.

💬 Dr James McDowall: How does he respond to the Aged Care Commissioner, who, when asked about nurses not being given a fast track to residence, said in select committee yesterday that there is “a significant need for nurses in the aged residential care sector” and that they would “prefer to see nurses being able to get into New Zealand quickly, now”?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: My response to that would be that we have enabled about 2,500 nurses, or health workers, to get through the border while the borders have been closed, through the critical health worker visa process. And, also, both of the components of the Green List have given certainties to the likes of nurses and other medical professionals around residency.

💬 Dr James McDowall: Is it logical that there are 17 varieties of doctor who are fast tracked on the Green List, while nurses, by far the most critical shortfall across the healthcare system, are excluded?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: The nurses are on the Green List. They are on a work to residence two-year pathway to residence. We give them certainty that if they want to come to New Zealand and nurse for two years they will become residents.

💬 Erica Stanford: Is it true that nurses currently coming into the country have access to the Resident Visa 2021, which takes around 12 months; so, in fact, the two-year pathway that he has created is in fact worse than what we have at the moment?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: Well, the member will know that the residence visa announced last year is a one-off pathway. Through the rebalance, we are giving nurses certainty about being residents here in New Zealand, if they make a commitment to come to New Zealand and nurse.

💬 Dr James McDowall: Does he believe that it is robust policy to make nurses wait two years before being able to apply for residence, given the Canterbury DHB alone is 250 nurses short, Christchurch Hospital is at 112 percent capacity, and that DHBs across the country are foreshadowing a worse than normal influenza season on top of COVID-19, all of which could cripple the health system?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: Yes. We want to make sure that we are giving nurses who want to come to New Zealand a certain pathway to residence. I think it would be worse for those employers if we bring nurses in and they go and undertake different employment. We actually want to attract nurses to come here and commit to nursing. If they do that for two years, New Zealand is guaranteeing them residency.

Ricardo Menéndez March: Does the Minister have any evidence that if nurses were to be given residency immediately upon arrival, they will be working in other professions other than nursing?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: As we went through the Cabinet process, I undertook consultation with the likes of the Ministry of Health. We did an assessment of the likelihood of nurses who are coming from offshore—the likelihood of them moving on to other occupations. There was a slightly increased risk of that and we did get feedback from the sector that they were concerned that if we went straight to residency, those nurses might move to different occupations upon arriving in New Zealand.

💬 Dr James McDowall: Supplementary?

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Sorry, ACT has run out of supplementaries.

Question No. 7—Housing (Māori Housing)

7. to the Associate Minister of Housing (Māori Housing): How is the Government partnering with iwi Māori to deliver new homes for whānau?

Alongside my colleagues Ministers Woods, Jackson, and Whaitiri, this morning we signed a new investment partnership between Government and Ngāti Kahungunu to build up to 131 new homes for whānau who need them the most. This partnership will see affordable rentals and papakāinga being built throughout the Ngāti Kahungunu rohe, getting whānau into dry, warm homes quickly, as well as helping some reconnect to their whenua. The partnership represents an innovative new approach to unlocking and enabling by Māori, for Māori housing solutions, and is funded from the Whai Kāinga Whai Oranga Government’s record $730 million commitment to accelerate Māori-led housing solutions. We know that innovative initiatives like this are critical for getting a lot more new housing built where it is needed the most, and they will also help stimulate regional economies and our construction sector to recover from COVID-19.

💬 Arena Williams: How does this partnership reflect the Government’s wider strategy for Māori housing?

💬 Hon PEENI HENARE: Today’s signing follows on from our previous agreements with Toitū Tairāwhiti in May and Ka Uruora in April this year as part of the National Māori Housing Strategy MAIHI Ka Ora. We said we would do things differently and work in partnership with Māori to deliver a better Māori housing future for our whānau. Above all, we promised action, and action to change the status quo. The partnership today is $45.3 million in investment to enable Ngāti Kahungunu to get whānau into homes quickly while reconnecting with their whenua.

💬 Arena Williams: What reaction has he seen from Ngāti Kahungunu about the partnership?

💬 Hon PEENI HENARE: Chrissie Hape, the chief executive of Ngāti Kahungunu said, and I quote, “The ability to provide healthy, warm homes for our whānau will make a significant difference for our whānau over a number of significant social indicators. We look forward to the future and acknowledge the partnership, and the strength of the partnership, and we move forward with intention alongside the Government.” Just finally from me, an invite to the Opposition parties of this House to get on board with the kaupapa, and I can sum it up by saying, kia tapatahi, kia kotahi rā tātou tātou e. [Let’s be cohesive and united, all of us together. ]

Question No. 8—Agriculture (Animal Welfare)

8. to the Associate Minister of Agriculture (Animal Welfare): How does Budget 2022 support Māori agribusiness and Whenua Māori Programme land users?

The Māori economy underpins the broader wellbeing of Māori and is a significant and increasingly important contributor to the economic recovery of the wider economy of Aotearoa New Zealand. Budget 2022’s investment of $34.5 million over four years will support Māori agribusinesses and whenua Māori land users in achieving real economic growth, and help reduce the on-farm greenhouse-gas emissions. Mr Speaker, I report to you on our recent Māori Minister’s post-Budget engagements with our communities and regions across Aotearoa New Zealand, who have welcomed this investment.

💬 Rino Tirikatene: How will this Budget initiative be implemented?

💬 Hon MEKA WHAITIRI: Over the last 18 months, I have visited Māori agribusinesses up and down the country, and a need for specialist advice and support has been raised. Budget 2022’s investment of $34.5 million over four years will support Māori agribusinesses and whenua Māori land users in achieving real economic growth, and help reduce the on-farm greenhouse-gas emissions. Specialist advice and support, including tools and technology as well as boots on the ground, is what Budget 2022 will deliver.

💬 Rino Tirikatene: When can we see these initiatives being implemented in our communities?

💬 Hon MEKA WHAITIRI: Work is already under way in shearing sheds and on farm, as we speak. Budget 2022 includes funding to boost support for Māori agribusinesses to explore new products and markets, and provide workforce skills and training initiatives that will create new jobs and increase productivity of their primary-sector assets. Investing in mātauranga Māori—traditional knowledge—in both land development and science will further strengthen economic opportunities while reducing greenhouse gases. This will be trailblazing.

Question No. 9—Immigration

9. to the Minister of Immigration: Does he stand by his statement regarding why engineers are on the fast-tracked ‘straight to residence’ pathway that “those skills are at high demand”; and why are nurses not on that pathway, when Hon Andrew Little, Minister of Health, recently admitted that New Zealand hospitals are around 4,000 nurses short?

Talofa lava, Mr Speaker. Yes, under the immigration settings that were in place pre-COVID and when that member’s party was last in Government, there was only one class of nurse eligible for a work-to-residence pathway. Under the rebalance, the work-to-residence pathway is extended to all 13 classes of nurses. This is a significant expansion and recognition of the demand that the health sector is currently experiencing. The reason there is a work-to-residence pathway, rather than “straight-to-residence” pathway is that we want these nurses to work in the health sector when they arrive. In simple: we need nurses to nurse.

💬 Erica Stanford: Who in the sector gave him advice that nurses tended to leave their profession when they got residence?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: In the formation of the policy, we spoke to the likes of the Aged Care Association and other home-based care stakeholders. Of course, through the pathway of this policy, we also kept in close contact with the Ministry of Health, and, also, I spoke to a number of colleagues.

💬 Erica Stanford: Isn’t it the case that the Aged Care Association were only in favour of a two-year wait for residence if their nurses were tied to their employer and not the sector?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: Well, they may have, but they didn’t necessarily get everything they wanted.

💬 Erica Stanford: So aren’t we now in a position where we have the worst of both worlds, where we have a two-year wait for nurses to get residence and they can still switch between the district health board and aged-care sector, which is exactly what we were trying to stop happening?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: I think we’ve made it pretty clear that we do have a shortage of nurses, and when they get here they can nurse.

💬 Erica Stanford: When he said that there was a slight chance of a small loss of nurses out of the profession if they were to get residence, is this small loss more or less than the loss that we will lose to Australia or Canada or the UK who give residence immediately to nurses?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: I think she might want check her facts, because I don’t necessarily think that happens in all of those jurisdictions.

💬 Erica Stanford: Can he explain what makes a nurse more likely to change jobs once they receive residence, but not an engineer?

💬 Hon KRIS FAAFOI: We made our decision to put the nurses on a two-year pathway to residence, because of the demand for nurses, in order to give them certainty that when they arrived in New Zealand, if they stayed in nursing for two years, they would get residence.

💬 Dr James McDowall: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek leave of the House for the ACT Party to have another supplementary question.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, the House can’t give you leave for that.

Question No. 10—Social Development and Employment

10. to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Is she concerned some of our most vulnerable tamariki in benefit-receiving households are going to miss out on the $350 cost of living payment?

Talofa lava, Mr Speaker. Budget 2022 responded to the needs of tamariki in benefit-receiving households in a number of ways. It removed the policy which withheld child support payments to sole parent beneficiaries, permanently halved public transport fares for people with a community services card, increased the grant available for essential dental work, and invested in disabilities services’ budgeting services and also in the education and health sectors. On top of this, on 1 April, main benefits were increased to historic levels and, on 1 May, 350,000 main benefit households began to receive the winter energy payment. It’s really important to note that the winter energy payment supports around 200,000 children and is a permanent fixture of our welfare system.

Ricardo Menéndez March: Will the Minister consider wiping debts to the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) to lift the incomes of over 50,000 people who got into debt because they couldn’t afford basic essentials, such as dental care or school uniforms, and now have their benefit reduced by $24 a week on average—almost the amount of the winter energy payment?

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

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: We currently have a cross-Government cross-agency work programme under way on how we respond to Government debt that New Zealanders incur. Currently, it’s treated differently across Justice, Inland Revenue, and MSD in particular, those three agencies, and there is some work that needs to go on with regards to making the system fairer and doing something to respond to New Zealanders who do have debt to Government. Are we thinking of wiping the debt that they have with any particular agency? That’s certainly not something that’s on the table at the moment.

Ricardo Menéndez March: Is the fact that hardship grants continue to go up a sign that people on a main benefit are not able to meet the basic costs of living?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: We absolutely acknowledge that New Zealanders are feeling the bite with regards to the cost of living increases that have come about because of everything that’s happening internationally. We are not alone as a country; we are experiencing this alongside so many other countries. We have seen hardship grant increases. That’s for a number of reasons. Cost of living surely does play a part, but, also, we have lifted thresholds so that more low-income families can also access hardship support. And we have been going through a pandemic which has seen some job losses, has seen some people with reduced hours, and that has all led towards an increase in hardship need.

Ricardo Menéndez March: When she speaks of the cost of living pressures that people on a benefit face, will she commit to immediately doubling the winter energy payment, as she did in 2020, so that cost of living pressures are alleviated for families relying on benefits?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: That is not a consideration for us. As I spoke about, in response to my primary answer, there are a number of changes that we have made to alleviate the hardship pressure on families and to address the income adequacy issues that many of our whānau who are on benefits face. There are more things that we have done alongside that, including things like indexing benefits to wages so that they go up more quickly on a standard year. Mr Benefit—oh, not “Mr Benefit”! Mr Speaker, I’ve never shied away from the fact that there is more to do, and we are absolutely committed to doing that.

Question No. 11—Community and Voluntary Sector

11. to the Minister for the Community and Voluntary Sector: Malo le soifua lau afioga le fofoga fetalai. What recent announcements has she made about proposed amendments to the Charities Act 2005?

Fa’afetai lou fofoga fetalai. This morning, I announced a range of proposed amendments to the Charities Act that aim to ensure we support charities to thrive while also ensuring sufficient public transparency. The changes include a new appeals process to improve access to justice for charities, expanding the decisions that can be appealed, reducing reporting requirements for very small charities, and improved transparency in the reporting of funds for larger charities. The work to modernise the Charities Act began in 2018. Public consultation took place in 2019. The work was paused when COVID-19 hit, and I picked this work back up last year and aim to introduce an amendment bill this year—just acknowledging the work of my predecessors, the Hon Peeni Henare and the Hon Poto Williams as well.

💬 Glen Bennett: Why is this significant?

💬 Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: There are about 28,000 registered charities—in case the Opposition didn’t realise—and they contribute greatly to the wellbeing of our communities across Aotearoa New Zealand. This was particularly evident over the past 2½ years, when charities provided a wide variety of support to those who needed it the most. More than half of these charities are small and volunteer led. The changes that I’m proposing aim to strike a fair balance between supporting them to focus on their work while ensuring that the public has trust and confidence in the sector. We’ve also heard from submitters that there is a need to increase the transparency of decision making by the regulator and to introduce a new appeals process given the inaccessibility of the current system, and we’re doing both.

💬 Hon David Bennett: How will these changes benefit charities?

💬 Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: In proposing to allow very small charities to be exempt from the external reporting board’s financial reporting standard, they will still continue to be accountable through annual returns, reporting basic financial information, and this aims to, again, strike that balance between the benefit of transparent reporting with the current compliance burden that very small charities experience. Charities will also be able to appeal significant decisions to an expanded taxation review authority instead of the High Court. This will improve access to justice by allowing charities to represent themselves, reduce legal fees, and appeal a wider range—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Minister has—

💬 Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: Sorry, Mr Speaker, I can’t hear you.

💬 Chris Bishop: Put out a press release about it!

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

💬 Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: Great. And just people can—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: No.

Question No. 12—Police

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

Fa’afetai afioga fofoga fetalai. I stand by the full context of all my statements, including my statement that the way to deal with gang tensions is by giving police the tools and resources they need, and that is why Budget 2022 includes $562 million for Police over four years, of which, $94 million will go towards tackling gangs and organised crime.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: What does the Minister consider the most important tool the Police need inside her firearms prohibition order (FPO) bill?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: As it relates to the primary question, Mr Speaker, the—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: No; I’ll be the judge of that. I’ll get the Hon Mark Mitchell to ask that question again.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: It was a question in relation to the Minister stating what tools the Police needed, and it was: what tool does the Minister think is most important that’s contained inside her firearms prohibition order bill?

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yeah, it definitely relates to the answer that you gave. The Hon Poto Williams.

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: Thank you. There are a range of measures under the FPOs that are important to Police being able to ensure that they deal with the most serious of our offenders, as opposed to previous legislation introduced by a member on that side of the House, which only dealt with gang members.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: What is the most important tool inside the firearms prohibition order bill?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: It is to deal with the most serious offenders, as opposed to what a National member introduced, which was just around gang members.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: How does she reconcile her statement with the horrific scene of a three-year-old left covered in blood yesterday, following an alleged attack by a Mongrel Mob member?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: There is no doubt that our communities are feeling some incredible distress with the recent activities. But in response to that, the Police have been working diligently. They’ve launched a major operation around disruption and suppression, and it includes the deployment of armed offenders squads to conduct search warrants and make arrests. Can I go on to say that 15 search warrants and warrantless searches have been carried out across Auckland, which have led to 17 arrests, the seizure of firearms and ammunition.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Would she say that gang tensions have increased as a result of the 14 drive-by shootings over the past few weeks?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: What I would point that member to is the fact that gangs’ serious crime rates were at their highest in 2010.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: What would the Minister consider is a rise in gang tensions?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: There is no doubt that, from time to time, gang tensions elevate, but gangs have been a feature of our communities for over 50 years. What I would also like to point the member to is the fact that we are charging gangs more than ever—up to 92 percent, which is more than that Government ever did.

💬 Hon Michael Wood: Will Police be better positioned to deal with gang tensions and violent events with higher or lower police numbers?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: I think the answer to that is obvious. The absolute record investment in Police, the commitment of 1,800, and the commitment to a population ratio, means they will have more people, more resource, and better training to do the work that they need to do.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Why have gang—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: No. Sorry; the National Party has run out of supplementary questions.