Oral Questions

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

Yes. Today, the Government introduced the United Kingdom Free Trade Agreement Legislation Bill, implementing the necessary legislative and regulatory amendments to give effect to the New Zealand - United Kingdom free-trade agreement. This is a gold standard free-trade agreement. Virtually all our current trade will be duty-free from entry into force, including duty-free quotas for key products like meat, butter, and cheese. The deal is expected to boost our GDP by up to $1 billion, supporting business and jobs across the economy and helping to accelerate our economic recovery. It’s estimated New Zealand goods exports to the UK will increase by over 50 percent through the agreement, and I look forward to further promoting trade and exports into the UK in my future travels.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Why are nurses not on Immigration New Zealand’s fast-tracked straight to residence pathway when we are 4,000 nurses short and Kiwis are having their surgeries cancelled?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The important point to note here is that they are on a fast track to residency, and this is the first time that registered nurses have been on the fast track. The only request that is being made is that they continue to work as nurses. If the member believes that we should remove that provision, then, essentially, he’s telling us that we should have no request that anyone enter and work in our stressed health workforce, which, surely, I would have thought, would have been the point of fast tracking residency.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Is she not aware that Immigration New Zealand has a visa pathway specifically called “the fast tracked straight to residence pathway”, listing 40 professions, and that nurses and midwives are not on it?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: We currently have 20,000 nurses registered but not practising in New Zealand. One of the issues that has been raised with us when we went out and consulted is a concern that if we did not attach to the residency pathway the requirement to keep working in nursing, there may be a loss of that nursing workforce. The point is to take stress—

💬 Erica Stanford: It has been debunked, and she knows it.

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: —Mr Speaker, if I may—out of the health workforce, and if the member thinks asking people to keep nursing is going to be a barrier, I can only assume, therefore, that people’s intention is not to work as nurses.

💬 Christopher Luxon: When she told Radio New Zealand that “we did have raised with us by some DHBs the concern of whether or not we were retaining everyone that was coming in as a nurse.”, which DHBs raised those concerns, and when?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I’m not going to name individual district health boards but the stats do demonstrate that we have a higher movement rate for those who have come in as migrants into the nursing workforce than the general nursing workforce. Can I also point out that this is on top of the work that we’ve already been doing to bring in critical purpose visas for health workers. We have had, even while our borders were closed, 5,700 critical purpose visas for health roles since COVID. We have been recruiting offshore. At the same time, we’ve had the Return to Nursing Workforce Support Fund to try to bring back some of those 20,000 who are trained as nurses but are currently not working as nurses. We’ve had the general nurses campaign; the New Entry to Practice Programme, which had $25 million put in in 2019; and we have increased our nursing workforce, as a Government, by 15 percent. We have focused on turning around an understaffed health workforce, and we continue to do so.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Was the health Minister, Andrew Little, wrong, then, when he wrote, in response to written questions, “I am advised that the Ministry of Health did not receive feedback specifically from the district health boards on migrant nurses leaving their profession.”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I was advised of this by Immigration New Zealand.

💬 David Seymour: If we accept that nurses are being fast tracked through the immigration process, how many nurses are currently in that fast-tracked process, and how long will it take each of them to go through it?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I think the member will know it’s not unreasonable to ask for a question of that nature to be put in writing, but, as was asked in the House yesterday—how many, for instance, came through the specific critical purposes visa programme that we had running over the course of COVID—we had 5,700 who were working across the health workforce who came in under that visa category. Happy to answer a question put in writing.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Can she explain why 40 occupations facing shortages, including multimedia specialists and food technologists, are on the fast-tracked straight to residence pathway but nurses and midwives are not and have to wait two years?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Again, this is guaranteed residency if you come and work as a nurse, so I fail to understand why the member sees it as so problematic. If our gap is in nursing, why not bond to nursing and guarantee residency? We need people to come in and work as nurses, and if they’re willing to do that, they are guaranteed residency.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Does she stand by her statement to overseas nurses yesterday that “Our message is come to New Zealand and you will be fast tracked for residency”, and, if so, why did she exclude nurses from the “Fast tracked straight to residence pathway”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I stand by my statements yesterday, and we have been running a recruitment campaign since February, also, to ensure that we are out there in the market trying to seek those who are willing to come and be nurses in New Zealand. At the same time, another thing that we have to rectify, and we’ve been doing this since 2017, is the underfunding both in our health system they will work in but also in the wages they are paid. We’ve seen a 20 percent, and in some cases 25 percent, increase in their salaries, that was needed because, under that Government, in some cases they were seeing increases of as little as 1 percent.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Isn’t it the case that, despite repeated warnings from the health sector and the Opposition over the last two years, her Government has simply failed to bring in the nurses we need to deal with something that was entirely predictable: the fact that people would get—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member has had his question.

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: First point: would we be in the position of recruiting nurses offshore if we did not have nearly a decade of under-investment in health by the National Government? We now are trying to train at record [Members interjecting] rates to make up for that.

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! The Prime Minister will resume her seat. This is an issue which I can tell the vast majority of the people in the House care about. I want—

💬 Christopher Luxon: We care about it, too.

💬 SPEAKER: The member is part of the vast majority of people in the House. I know he’s a relatively new member, but he does not interject when I’m on my feet. I want to be able to hear the answer, and I’m having trouble hearing it because of the barracking from my left.

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: And, at the same time, we have increased health funding every year, as a Government, and can I point out the contradiction of having just delivered the largest budget and investment into health that this country has seen and the National Party want to cancel it and instead give broad-base tax cuts. At the same time, we’ve funded 3,400 extra nurses, we have 1,400 extra doctors, and we have funded more vacancies to take pressure off as well. Now, yes, because of lack of investment, we are having to look offshore, but that member should look in the mirror at his own Government’s policies as to why we are in this position.

Question No. 2—Finance

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

The manufacturing sector has remained robust in a challenging environment. The seasonally adjusted BNZ - Business New Zealand Performance and Manufacturing Index for May rose 1.7 points to 52.9, just below its long-term average. Production, new orders, employment, and delivery of raw materials all expanded, and BNZ’s economists said that manufacturing output in the first three months of the 2022 year had been affected by Omicron-induced delays and the improvement in production signalled a decent rebound in manufacturing in the June quarter. The volatile global environment means 2022 is continuing to be challenging for businesses and households, but New Zealand’s strong response to the pandemic has put us in a position where we can come through better than most other countries and are well positioned to deal with the challenges ahead of us.

💬 Helen White: What other reports has he seen on the economy?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Retail card spending has also remained resilient. Statistics New Zealand reported earlier this month that seasonally adjusted retail card spending rose 1.9 percent in May compared with the previous month, led by fuel and clothing sales. Stripping out fuel, core spending rose by 0.9 percent. The figures indicate that spending patterns are returning to a normal pattern following the end of COVID restrictions and the opening up to the rest of the world.

💬 Helen White: What support has been available for businesses as the economy deals with the challenges of Omicron?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The targeted COVID support payment has helped keep viable the vulnerable businesses through the peak of Omicron. As of June, this payment had paid out $1.3 billion to 112,877 applicants. On a regional basis, Auckland has received 50.5 percent of the payments, followed by Christchurch on 9.6 percent and Wellington on 8 percent. By industry, construction made up 15.2 percent of all payments, followed by accommodation on 14.8 percent, other services on 9.3 percent, and retail trade on 8 percent. This payment has provided cash flow and confidence to help protect jobs and support New Zealand businesses through a very difficult time. We stand by the decisions that the Government has made to support businesses and households to get through Omicron and give us the strong basis to move forward from now.

Question No. 3—Finance

3. to the Minister of Finance: What advice, if any, has he received about how much more interest each year someone with a $700,000 mortgage would be required to pay on a renewed mortgage today compared to the start of last year, and what impact does he expect rising interest rates will have on the cost of living?

In answer to the first part of the member’s question, it may surprise her to know that I do not receive advice about such hypothetical examples with no parameters set out on the characteristics of the mortgage in question, such as the level of the mortgage at the start of last year, the parameters the mortgage had at the start of the last year—for example, whether it might have been a three-year term or on a floating rate, whether the principal payments were being made over 18 months, or what the split might be between the principal and interest payments at any specific point in time—and what interest rates were at each point in time. In response to the second part of the question, as I have said many times, there is no doubt that the global inflation spike currently being experienced is putting pressure on households in a number of ways, and one of those will be the impact of rising interest rates. Independent central banks around the world are increasing rates. Higher interest rates do mean that the cost of borrowing is higher, and this will feed through to the economy in a number of different ways. I expect that the effects may be similar to when the official cash rate rose under the previous National Government in 2010 and 2014.

💬 Nicola Willis: Has he had advice on how many New Zealand mortgage holders will face a degree of financial stress in the next year as a result of rapidly rising interest rates?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: What advice I have received—and the member will have seen this in the public arena as well—is that around half of New Zealanders who have mortgages would expect to be needing to re-fix them over the next year. Not all of those people will suffer financial stress as a result, but all New Zealanders are suffering the pressure of the global inflation spike. It’s the reason why we’ve stepped in to support New Zealanders through things like our 1 April package and the cost of living payment—all things the National Party continues to oppose.

💬 Nicola Willis: Can he confirm that New Zealanders have not experienced such a rapid increase in interest rates since the official cash rate came into being?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Well, what I can confirm is that in 2010 and 2014, the official cash rate was increased under the previous Government. I can say that, in 2014, it went from 2.5 percent in March of that year to 3.5 percent by late July. The member also knows that those are decisions taken by the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (RBNZ) independently.

💬 Nicola Willis: Is he aware that a New Zealander with a floating $700,000 mortgage from ANZ in New Zealand currently pays $296 more per week in interest than someone with the same mortgage in Australia, and can he explain why that is?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: There will be many different reasons for that, and at the risk of trying the Speaker’s patience going through all of the different elements of what makes up a reason—

💬 David Seymour: Oh, come on.

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: —for someone’s mortgage payments, we have discussed—

💬 SPEAKER: Well, Mr Seymour says that the member should do it, so the member can.

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As we’ve discussed a number—I thank the member—of times in this House, the impacts of the global pandemic and, indeed, of the global inflation spike will be felt at different times in different countries.

💬 Nicola Willis: Is he concerned that mortgage interest rates are now exceeding commercial test rates, which, according to the RBNZ, were between 5.5 and 6.5, and, if so, can he tell the House how many mortgage holders are expected to come under significant financial pressure in the coming months?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As I said in my earlier answer, we understand on this side of the House that the increase in inflation around the world is now being responded to by central banks independently lifting the official cash rate. That is what is happening in New Zealand. If the member is advocating a policy where she or some other person controls what the official cash rate is, that is an interesting idea and one that harks back to another time. On this side of the House, we understand the role of monetary policy. We also understand the role of fiscal policy to support New Zealanders through this time, and all we’ve heard from the National Party is opposition to the support we’re providing to New Zealand households.

💬 Nicola Willis: Why is the Minister unable to confirm how many New Zealanders will face significant financial stress as a result of the fastest rise in the official cash rate—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! I’m going to invite the member to rephrase the question.

💬 Nicola Willis: Well, will the Minister finally take this opportunity to name the number of New Zealanders who will face significant financial stress in the next year as a result of the fastest increase in the official cash rate in New Zealand’s history, and, if he will not name that number, can we expect him to continue—

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

💬 Nicola Willis: —with the see no evil—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member’s gone away from areas that the—the basis of a supplementary question has to be somewhere in the first part of it. We have to get to something which is the Minister’s responsibility, and that number is not his responsibility.

💬 Nicola Willis: Point of order, Mr Speaker.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, I hope the member’s not going to argue with me, because we’ll end up with a problem.

💬 Nicola Willis: Well, Minister, I would point out that what I asked—

💬 SPEAKER: I’m not a Minister any more.

💬 Nicola Willis: Sorry, Mr Speaker. My question was about whether or not the Minister would seek advice. Now, the advice he seeks or doesn’t seek is absolutely his responsibility. Now, he can say that he doesn’t wish to seek that advice; that’s fine. I’d like—

💬 SPEAKER: No, no.

💬 Nicola Willis: —him to confirm that.

💬 SPEAKER: No—sorry. The member’s question was very narrow around the advice sought, and it was how much more interest each year someone—it was one person. There was nothing about how many people.

💬 Nicola Willis: But—speaking to the point of order—

💬 SPEAKER: No, no—no more. The member can ask another supplementary if she wants to.

💬 David Seymour: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Frequently in question time, the Minister is asked questions by the Labour side about economic conditions, and frequently he takes credit for all sorts of things to do with terms of trade, GDP, and so on. Surely, someone on this side of the House can ask about the effects of interest rates on households and the bills they have to pay. How is one possible and the other not?

💬 SPEAKER: Well, of course they can—of course they can. All they have to do is get the primary question right.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Point of order, Mr Speaker. The consideration that you need to make is whether or not the question was in order. Now, it certainly related to the primary question that’s on notice. It’s perfectly legitimate for the Minister to say, “I have no ministerial responsibility for that aspect of the question.”, but to rule it out anticipating that, I think, is detracting from the exchange—

💬 SPEAKER: OK, all right.

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: —in question time.

💬 SPEAKER: No—thank you. I’ve had enough of this. There’s going to be no more there. The member knows that it is part of the Speaker’s role to make a judgment about whether a Minister has responsibility for a question. The member knows that very well—he’s been a Minister. He’s seen it happen on lots and lots of occasions.

💬 Nicola Willis: Will the Minister now confirm that he has not sought advice about the number of New Zealanders who will face significant financial stress in the coming year as a result of the fastest increase in the official cash rate in New Zealand’s history?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I get—

💬 SPEAKER: I will allow the Minister to answer, even though it was a neat attempt that didn’t make it.

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: —advice from a range of sources about the impact of the global inflation shock on New Zealanders. The Reserve Bank publishes regular material on the stability of New Zealand’s financial system. What that material shows us is that New Zealand has a robust financial system. There will be individual households who will suffer stress as the result of interest rates going up. This Government is prepared to support them.

Question No. 4—Justice

4. to the Minister of Justice: Does she stand by her statement that she will bring “a very victim-centric” approach to her new job; and, if so, will she commit to advocating for an increase in the funding available for victims in the next Budget to support her approach?

In response to the first part of the question: yes. In response to the second part of the question: I will always advocate for my sector, but the member will be aware, I cannot prejudge future Budget discussions.

💬 Nicole McKee: Does her victim-centric approach mean she will now consult with the victims of three-strike offenders, which her predecessor did not do, before proceeding to repeal the three-strikes law, and, if not, why not?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: The three-strikes legislation was introduced for the purpose of deterrence—

💬 David Seymour: Yes or no.

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Who was that?

💬 Hon Member: David Seymour.

💬 SPEAKER: OK. We’ll keep going, and—I’ve just about washed my hands of that one.

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: The purpose of three-strikes legislation when it was introduced was for the intent of deterrence. It has not proven to be a deterrent and therefore, no. We will proceed to introduce that legislation.

💬 Nicole McKee: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I asked about whether or not the Minister was intending to speak to victims of three-strike offenders, and I don’t believe that that was answered.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, I think if the member looks at her colleague’s copy of Speakers’ rulings, she will look at 184 and get the answer to that point of order.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does she agree that for her officials to admit to deliberately excluding victims from the victim support scheme by a deliberate strategy of under-promoting the scheme scarcely speaks of a victim-centric approach, and, if so, why would Kiwis believe her stated intention to be focused on victims more than they had believed the predecessors’ similar statements by Mr Kris Faafoi and Andrew Little?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: The premise of the question is that victims have not been supported. I think, over successive Governments, there has been significant under-investment into a victim-centric approach. Budget 2022—the first priority of the justice sector was to ensure a victim-centred approach, which saw the uplift of over $46 million specifically targeted towards victims; $12.4 million is to go directly towards providing in excess of over 7,000 more additional grants to victims.

💬 Nicole McKee: What does she intend to do about the victims of crime who are owed more than $35 million in unpaid reparations?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: Unpaid reparations is one area of concern for us, and it’s something that I’m taking advice on right now.

💬 Nicole McKee: Will she ensure that the Victim Assistance Scheme will reach, assist, and support more than the 4 percent of victims it currently supports?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: As previously just stated, there has been successive under-investment for victims across multiple Governments. To put it in context, the total funding for the Victim Assistance Scheme is now $14.6 million per year, compared to $5.3 million in 2017 under the last National-ACT Government. Victims are our priority and we will ensure that there is a victim-centred approach in the justice sector.

💬 Nicole McKee: Will she commit to ensuring a greater portion of the proceeds of crime fund goes towards supporting victims, and that it will never again be used to fund the Mongrel Mob?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: I am sure that we are investing directly millions of dollars from the proceeds of crime to victims. A good example of that recently is the $6 million that we’ve provided for business owners who have been subjected to ram raids.

Question No. 5—Tourism

5. to the Minister of Tourism: What response has he seen from the tourism industry following the announcement to remove pre-departure testing?

The tourism industry has been delighted with the Government’s decision, as announced by Minister Verrall, to remove pre-departure testing from 20 June. Rebecca Ingram, the chief executive of Tourism Industry Aotearoa, the peak body for tourism, summed it up when she said, and I quote, “The earlier date will be a boost for the ski industry, with the news following Queenstown’s biggest snowfall in years … We’re excited that we can now move into the next phase of recovery and confidently welcome more international … (visitors) to our shores.”

💬 Dr Tracey McLellan: What, if anything, has the Government done to help the ski industry recover?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: In April, Cabinet approved a border exemption for 275 skilled ski workers to enter New Zealand. This has since been increased to 335 places due to the demand. NZSki chief executive Paul Anderson has noted that the outlook for the season is extremely positive and they had filled all the roles and were ready for the season. This past Saturday, I had great pleasure to accompany the Prime Minister to the Remarkables, where we officially opened the 2022 ski season. I can categorically say to international visitors that the snow is here, the requirement for pre-departure testing is gone, and we are ready to welcome you.

💬 Dr Tracey McLellan: What is the Government doing to help the tourism industry move into the next stage of recovery?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: The $54.2 million innovation programme for tourism recovery that I announced on Budget day will see the Government working alongside tourism businesses and key stakeholders to develop new, innovative ideas that will improve the sustainability and productivity of eligible businesses. The industry transformation plan for tourism, a partnership between workers, business, Māori, and the Government, has an objective of establishing a regenerative model for tourism. Its initial focus is on better work, which is a key issue for the tourism workforce. I will have more to say on this later in the year, but in the meantime I can say again to international tourists, the snow is fantastic, the borders are open, and New Zealanders are here to welcome you.

Question No. 6—Police

Question No. 6—Mark Mitchell.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: At last!

Order! Who was that who made that interjection? Well, can I just ask the Minister to curb his enthusiasm.

6. to the Minister of Police: Does he stand by his statement, “we do acknowledge that, particularly when it comes to gangs, there is escalating tension there”; if so, when did the Government first recognise that gang tensions were escalating?

Yes. Since the day this Government came into office, we’ve recognised the urgent need for more police on the beat and to make sure that they’ve got the right tools and the right support in place so that they can tackle crime—including gang crime. It’s the reason that this Government has increased the Police budget every year that we have been in Government, and it’s why, in Budget 2022, we boosted Police funding by $562 million. It’s why the number of staff working on organised crime has doubled, and we now have the largest police force ever.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: If the Minister realised on the first day they came into Government that there was a problem with escalating crime, why didn’t they do something instead of allowing gang membership to grow by 40 percent—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Two legs to a question.

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: One of the things this Government is absolutely committed to doing is making sure that, when we make commitments around policing, we deliver on them. I note that something like firearms protection orders, for example, were promised in 2014 and not delivered. They were then promised again in 2016 and not delivered. Our Government is actually going to deliver them.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Does he support the current ban on gang patches in hospitals and schools?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I have no intention of changing that law.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: If he supports the banning of gang insignia in hospitals and schools, will he extend that to public places?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I have no intention to do so.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Has he seen reports that an aggravating factor of the open gang warfare between the Killer Beez and the Tribesmen is the wearing of gang patches?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I’ve certainly seen commentary to that effect. [Members cheer]

💬 Hon Michael Woodhouse: Point of order. In light of the enthusiasm by the Government for Mr Mitchell to have more questions, I seek leave for two supplementary questions to be added.

💬 SPEAKER: No, supplementary questions are, in the end, at my discretion. But I do think it’s a reasonable suggestion. Mr Mitchell will have two extras now, and the Opposition won’t suffer as a result.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Does the Minister think that the current ban on gang patches in schools and hospitals is a good policy?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: As I’ve already indicated, I have no intention of changing it.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Would the police Minister, seeing as he won’t change the policy in relation to gang patches being banned in schools and hospitals, extend it to public places?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Again, I’ve already—he’s very quick on his feet, that one! But I have no intention of doing so.

💬 SPEAKER: There is something about déjà vu revisited! If the member wants another two, he can have them.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Why, under this soft-on-crime Labour Government, with record investment and record police numbers, are our streets more dangerous, with 23 drive-by shootings in Auckland, terrorising local communities; how has this Government allowed this country to get to that state?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I’ll tell you what a soft-on-crime position is: it’s saying that, if gang activity is taking place, as long as we can’t see it, it’s not a problem. That is the most soft-on-crime position I have seen in a long time, and it came from that member.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Why has the Minister, if he acknowledges that this Government recognised that there was an issue with gangs, waited five years for a dedicated task force to be put in place, when we told them and challenged them to do this five years ago?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: That’s just simply not true. The Government’s been increasing resourcing for the Police since we first came into Government. As I’ve indicated before, I first saw reports back in 2014 that there was going to be an organised task force on gang-related crime. It was announced by a National Minister, and it didn’t happen. It was then re-announced two years later by a National Minister, and it didn’t happen.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Why is this soft-on-crime Government—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! The member’s had his extra two, I think, three times, but I’ve seen a wave from the ACT Party, who think it’s very unfair that the National Party gets so many opportunities. So there will be one question from a member of the ACT Party if they want it.

💬 David Seymour: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Does the Minister stand by his statement in question time yesterday that he would ensure the Police were operating under the correct laws and have the correct resourcing, and, if so, why didn’t the last police Minister do it, and why should we believe he will if she didn’t?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: She absolutely did.

💬 Hon Stuart Nash: Has the Minister seen reports that Police numbers actually decreased in the last three years of the previous National Government?

💬 SPEAKER: If he had, it would not be something he had responsibility for.

Question No. 7—Health (Māori Health)

7. to the Associate Minister of Health (Māori Health): How is the Government supporting Māori primary and community care providers to lift their capability, capacity, and service sustainability?

Budget 2022 provides an additional $30 million over four years to support Māori primary and community care provider development through the Māori Provider Development Scheme (MPDS). This is the biggest uplift to the MPDS since it was established in 1997, and it will help secure the primary and community care innovation developed by Māori health providers during the COVID-19 pandemic, and will help them transition those new capabilities into the new health system. The funding will also provide back-office support to providers and help them sustain their capital infrastructure, and it will support the hiring and retention of a qualified and trained workforce in the development of new service delivery methods specifically for Māori, which we know make a big difference to how our community engages with the health system.

💬 Arena Williams: How will this funding support equity in the health system?

💬 Hon PEENI HENARE: Māori providers play an essential role in delivering kaupapa Māori - based health and social services in our communities. They both deliver services and provide a conduit for community engagement and participation for Māori whānau because of their trusted relationships in the community. Most of these providers operate as non-profit organisations. Their primary funding is project-specific investment that generally covers direct cost and limited overheads related to specific services. For these providers, a long-term capability sustainment and capacity development comes from the MPDS. The initiative will ensure that the MPDS can support these providers, especially smaller- and rural- and region-based providers to maintain and expand their capability and capacity to deliver care to their communities and ensure their meaningful participation in the new health system.

💬 Arena Williams: What reaction has he seen to the announcement of this new funding?

💬 Hon PEENI HENARE: When I announced this investment last month at Mahitahi Hauora in Te Tai Tokerau, providers were ecstatic to hear the news. Te Puea Winiata, chief executive of Turuki Healthcare in South Auckland, said, “This funding will support us as providers to increase our capability, capacity, and service sustainability. This funding is especially needed right now as we continue to support whānau Māori through the long tail of COVID-19.” Hingatu Thompson, chief executive for Manaaki Ora Trust, said, “Māori provider development scheme has historically enabled Māori providers to be sustainable in the challenging environment. The increase ensures Māori providers are able to extend their capacity to support whānau and the wider health system to respond during extraordinary times.” This announcement has been well received and I’m proud this Government is making the investment.

Question No. 8—Building and Construction

8. to the Minister for Building and Construction: When was the Government first made aware of the nationwide Gib shortage, and when does she expect to implement any recommendations made by yesterday’s reported “high level taskforce”?

The Government first became aware of supply chain issues for Gib and other building products in the context of alert level 4 restrictions in August-September of last year. As a result of this, on 10 September, when the chief executive of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) authorised certain businesses or services that were located within the alert level 4 area to operate the manufacture of Gib, Winstone Wallboards was one of these businesses. At the time, it was thought to be not a systemic supply issue, and its stock levels were OK, but it was a matter of logistics. However, in November 2021, the building and construction industry began to report shortages of a number of products, including Gib. In response, MBIE issued guidance on product substitution on 6 December 2021 to ease shortages. This guidance included plasterboard. In response to the second part of the question, it’s important the member understands this is not a formal ministerial inquiry. This is a group of private sector experts brought together to advise me, to ensure the effective and swift execution and implementation of measures taking place. I expect issues raised at the first meeting next Monday will be actioned straight away.

💬 Andrew Bayly: Why did she claim yesterday that “The task force has already got action under way. There are 28 containers of plasterboard that are on their way to New Zealand that will help alleviate the shortage.”, when the task force had absolutely no role in obtaining those supplies?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I said it because it is the case. If the member cares to have a look at the membership of the task force—in particular Shane Brealey of Simplicity Living, who we have been working with for a number of weeks—these are the group of people that are taking the actions that will solve this crisis and why our Government is committed to working in partnership with them.

💬 Andrew Bayly: Does she agree with Bright Build director Jennifer Taylor on reputable international plasterboard brands that “We could get their products certified for New Zealand incredibly easily. The Government could assist to actually get these fast-tracked, onto containers and into New Zealand”, and, if so, why hasn’t she instructed MBIE to just do that?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Yes, I do agree with the person the member is quoting, and this is exactly what is happening. In fact, I think the member is referring to an interview this morning where the actual product, Boral, that she was referring to has already been covered off by guidance that MBIE has issued earlier this year, in addition to three other certified products.

💬 Andrew Bayly: When she said yesterday that “if only the world were that simple”, what is so difficult about allowing accredited international plasterboard manufacturers to supply New Zealand automatically, provided they meet New Zealand standard 2588?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I think the member needs to look at the complexity of this problem. Obviously, the—

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: —accreditation is an incredibly important part of this. We have already taken measures in terms of issuing guidance. In terms of identifying other products that meet the New Zealand standard, this is an issue that we do need to bring several parts to. Believe me, if this was as simple as passing a simple piece of legislation, we would have done that months ago when we began working on it, but I prefer the advice of private sector individuals that are working at the coalface of this than the member of Parliament opposite.

💬 Andrew Bayly: Is she aware those 28 containers of plasterboard represent 0.003 percent of annual plasterboard demand in New Zealand, and, if so, why is she taking public credit for a close to zero increase in plasterboard supply?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Obviously, 28 container loads of plasterboard are not going to solve the current problem we have in New Zealand, and far from taking credit, I announced yesterday that we are going to work with the individuals that are finding solutions to this. I fail to see why it is the Opposition are so averse to working with the private sector on solving this.

Question No. 9—Digital Economy and Communications

9. to the Minister for the Digital Economy and Communications: What recent announcements has he made about improving connectivity in rural New Zealand?

More good news. Last week, I was delighted to announce how $60 million allocated through Budget 2022 will be used to further improve rural connectivity over the next few years. The COVID-19 pandemic has shown us, time and again, how critical a reliable connection is important to learning, to working, and to socialising at home. For rural businesses, a reliable connection affords them opportunity to be more innovative and more productive, and that’s exactly what we need as we go about securing an economic recovery for the country. This fund was a 2020 election promise, and we have delivered on that promise.

💬 Jamie Strange: How will the funding be allocated?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: The sum of $43 million will be used to improve network capacity and speeds where rural users have been experiencing slow broadband. This includes, but is not limited to, settlements in the Far North, Gisborne, the Manawatū and Whanganui region, Taranaki, Southland, and—the member will be pleased—the mighty Waikato. In addition, $15 million will go towards a new initiative called the Remote Users Scheme. This scheme will aim to provide broadband services to New Zealanders in some of the country’s most remote locations—those who right now have no coverage or only have voice calling and text message services—plus there’s a provision for an additional $2 million to be spent on extending the successful Marae Digital Connectivity initiative for up to two years.

💬 Jamie Strange: How many people stand to benefit from this funding?

💬 Hon Dr DAVID CLARK: Taken together with the rural capacity upgrades I announced in February, the Government has now allocated over $90 million towards upgrading the capacity of rural networks, to be rolled out over the next three years. Tens of thousands of rural residents stand to benefit from this combined investment. This is over and above those already receiving improved broadband through the existing RBI 2—or Rural Broadband Initiative phase two—which has another year yet to run. By the end of next year, we’re on track to see 99.8 percent of the population with access to new or improved broadband connections.

Question No. 10—Police

10. to the Minister of Police: What did he mean when he said yesterday, “I think the work she was doing around culture change in the police was very important and I hope that we’ll be able to continue that”, and does he believe that the current culture of police is completely focused on catching criminals?

I meant what I said. Throughout the country, over the last 14 years that I’ve been a member of Parliament, I’ve met members of the Police Force who are committed to continual improvement and I absolutely back the work that the current Police leadership are doing in ensuring that Police have an internal culture that is supporting the Police to constantly strive to do better and to constantly strive to serve our communities better. I believe that that involves focusing on cracking down on criminal offending but it also focuses on cracking down on some of the causes of that offending before it happens.

💬 Chris Baillie: Does he believe there is systemic racism within the New Zealand Police and how does focusing on this kind of identity politics help catch criminals?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Within any organisation the size of the New Zealand Police, there are going to be people with a wide variety of different views. I think that it’s important that everybody, when it comes to issues around race, has the opportunity to reflect on their views, their own feelings, their own thoughts, and have the opportunity to consider how they might do things differently and how they might incorporate that into their practice. I think every organisation in the country is grappling with this and I think that that’s a positive thing, whether it be our school system, whether it be our police, whether it be our health system, or whether it be large corporations who are also grappling with it. I think that those conversations can be incredibly positive.

💬 Chris Baillie: Does he stand by a police report that says, “Imperialism has instilled a legacy of eurocentrism, neo-liberalism, and white supremacy” and that “that had become a core component of policing delivery in the criminal justice system”, and, if so, how will that research help catch criminals?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Without having seen the report, I don’t think it would be fair to comment on it.

💬 Chris Baillie: Does he stand by his statement, “My first job as Minister of Police will be making sure that police have everything they need in order to do their job effectively.”, and what additional tools do Police need to catch criminals that they don’t currently have?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Yes, I absolutely do. It’s one of the reasons why this Government, as I’ve indicated before, has increased the Police budget every year that we have been in Government. Of course, the criminals don’t just continue to repeat the same patterns of offending year after year; they evolve and adapt their criminal offending patterns, and we need to continue to evolve and adapt the Police’s response as well. I’ll be in touch with Police regularly, talking to them about what new tools they might need and we will respond accordingly.

💬 Chris Baillie: What does he say to Police officers who tell me that they can’t get on with their job of catching criminals because they’re not supported by the Government to use the tools they currently already have at their disposal?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I don’t agree with the member’s statement. This Government has given the Police more tools and more resources than they have ever had before.

💬 SPEAKER: Now, that looks like Julie Anne Genter, who’s clearly not participating remotely, as my notes say.

💬 Hon Julie Anne Genter: Sorry

💬 SPEAKER: The Hon Julie Anne Genter—question No. 11.

Question No. 11—Transport

11. to the Minister of Transport: Does he stand by his statement that “Investment in green transport options is a triple win for climate action – it reduces traffic congestion, promotes a healthy, active lifestyle and clears up the air around us”; if so, how does that factor into his consideration of options for mass rapid transit in Wellington?

Yes. Mode shift is one of the key investment objectives of the Let’s Get Wellington Moving programme and the various options that have been put forward for mass rapid transit will be considered against that and other objectives.

💬 Hon Julie Anne Genter: What is his response to Dr Ralph Chapman that the Let’s Get Wellington Moving options, which include $2.2 billion in new road tunnels, will come with a large quantity of embedded carbon emissions and will also induce more traffic?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: I would note a couple of things. One is that one of the road tunnels that I believe is being referred to there within options one and two of the Let’s Get Wellington Moving programme is in fact a road tunnel that will be primarily used for bus rapid transit. Secondly, I would note that, by definition, any investment in hard transport infrastructure will carry with it embedded carbon emissions. The key point is to consider the overall outcome that is achieved, and I’m confident that across all of the options that are up for consideration—which have not been decided upon yet—there will, overall, be carbon savings through a shift to high-quality public transport, walking, and cycling.

💬 Hon Julie Anne Genter: Can he confirm the analysis shows the majority of time savings for buses from the eastern suburbs is achieved by the bus priority measures also included in option four, not the $2.2 billion in road tunnels in options one and two?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: Across the various options, there are a range of configurations. My understanding is that some benefits are achieved by both of them. In respect of the additional tunnelling options around the Basin Reserve that are part of options one and two, there are a range of benefits, including some time savings for public transport, but more generally a better urban form and also, I would note, better and safer walking and cycling options for Wellington commuters.

💬 Hon Julie Anne Genter: Can you confirm the analysis shows the proposed $2.2 billion for new road tunnels will save only 1.5 minutes for a car travelling from Johnsonville to the airport at peak time, and even less for those travelling from the eastern suburbs to the city centre, compared to option four, which is the most climate-friendly option?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: All of the options have different trade-offs within them. I do just need to note that I think the characterisation of a bus rapid transit tunnel through Mount Victoria as “a road tunnel” doesn’t really characterise the benefits that are carried with it. There are a range of different benefits which cut across all of the different options. One of the things that I would note—bearing in mind that decisions have not yet been made—is that we will need to consider, also, the degree of additional housing that is enabled by the different options, which is a benefit in and of itself, but also that if that is maximised there are potentially longer-term carbon savings from reduced emissions from that more intensified housing model.

💬 Hon Julie Anne Genter: Is he aware that with the money saved from going with the most climate-friendly option—option four—we could build bus rapid transit to Karori with significant time savings for bus users from the northern suburbs, as well as the time savings from the bus priority measures in option four for those from the east and south?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: As I’ve noted in previous answers, the trade-offs are complex between options—for example, the broader Let’s Get Wellington Moving programme as a part of the City Streets programme is indeed creating better bus access to a range of suburbs around Wellington. It is true that there are a range of costs across options one to four for mass rapid transit, but there are also a range of different benefits between those projects that we need to carefully balance up and consider.

💬 Hon Julie Anne Genter: Will he promise to current and future New Zealanders to fully apply the goals and initiatives in the emissions reduction plan to the Government’s recommended option for Let’s Get Wellington Moving?

💬 Hon MICHAEL WOOD: Yes. The emissions reduction plan is Government policy and something that we give great priority to. We will be considering that as we consider the best options to take mass rapid transit in Wellington forward, as we will be considering the investment objectives. I note that there was a 40 percent weighting on the mode shift objective within the Let’s Get Wellington Moving programme. Again, I would just note to the member that none of these choices and trade-offs are necessarily as simple and didactic as saying it’s “A versus B”; the trade-offs are often very complex. For example, as I said before in a previous question, the ability to significantly uplift urban housing along this corridor is potentially one of the ways that we can provide the greatest medium to long term carbon savings.

Question No. 12—Workplace Relations and Safety

12. to the Associate Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety: What announcement has the Government made about supporting new parents?

Last week, the Government announced that paid parental leave entitlements will increase on 1 July this year from $621 to $661 per week, a 6.3 percent increase before tax. This additional $40 a week will support approximately 20,000 Kiwi families and will see those parents taking the full 26 weeks of parental leave receive up to an additional $1,040 of support over that period. The Government’s committed to continuing to support new parents during the crucial early months of their babies’ lives.

💬 Camilla Belich: How does the increase to paid parental leave entitlements build on the Government’s previous efforts to help new parents?

💬 Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: We know that having a parent at home as long as possible to care for a child provides a huge benefit for that child’s development, and that’s why we previously extended the duration of parental leave entitlements to 26 weeks. The Government is committed to making sure that families and parents receive the support they need to give their new child the best start to life, and paid parental leave is one way to ensure this happens.

💬 Camilla Belich: What other work is the Government doing to support new parents?

💬 Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: Since we came in to office, we’ve delivered a range of policies and support for new parents. We’ve boosted the Working for Families payments, and the Best Start payments that provide financial support to all families with a newborn baby, and made successive increases to the minimum wage. We’ve delivered a cost of living package more recently, including a short-term payment for the 2.1 million people, including new and expecting parents, earning up to $70,000. Overall, we’ve introduced measures that have increased families’ incomes, lifted 66,500 children out of poverty, and seen a reduction in child poverty across all nine measures used.