Oral Questions

1. to the Minister of Education: What further COVID-19 support is the Government providing schools this winter?

The Government is providing additional funding this winter to encourage schools and centre-based early childhood education services to maintain healthy levels of heating and ventilation. In addition, the Government has already provided every school in New Zealand with carbon dioxide monitors to help them identify the spaces where maintaining good ventilation can be proven to be more challenging, and we’ve purchased 12,500 air cleaners to help improve the ventilation in those areas. Every school has access to those air cleaners at no cost, if they need them, to help supplement their approach to ventilation this winter.

💬 Jo Luxton: What has been the basis for this support, and why is it so important for schools?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: This work addresses concern that has been raised that some schools and services may be reluctant to maintain effective natural ventilation during winter due to potential heat loss. The Ministry of Education has researched international best practice and conducted joint studies of classroom ventilation with the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, and they’ve worked with the University of Canterbury to estimate potential heat loss due to improved ventilation. Good ventilation over winter can lead to some additional heat loss and higher heating bills. The winter energy payments that we’re making to schools will help to reassure schools and early childhood services that they can balance heating and ventilation while COVID-19 continues to circulate widely within the community without unaffordable energy bills.

💬 Jo Luxton: What will be the eligibility for schools to be able to access this support?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: There will be $3.6 million allocated to schools, kura, teen parent units, and activity centres. The amounts will range from $200 up to a cap of $4,000. For most, it will amount to a 5 percent top-up of their annual heat, light, and water funding allocation. In addition, $1.4 million will go to centre-based early childhood education services. The Government doesn’t usually explicitly fund energy costs for these services, but the COVID-19 pandemic is a unique situation. We’ll also be providing an additional one-off payment to fund portable carbon dioxide monitors for centre-based early childhood services that serve disadvantaged communities.

Question No. 2—Finance

2. to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with Westpac that “Consumer confidence has plummeted, as household budgets have been squeezed by higher mortgage rates and increases in living costs”, and when does he expect wage growth to catch up with price increases? I see you’re raring to go.

on behalf of the Minister of Finance: Buckle in! Given the increases in global inflation, which is tracking over 9 percent on average across the OECD, the ongoing disruptions to supply chains, and the impacts of the war in Ukraine, it’s not surprising that consumer confidence has been affected. The report referenced by the member also notes the factors contributing to the resilience of the New Zealand economy, such as the strength of the labour market, with unemployment at just 3.2 percent. In answer to the second part of the question, the global energy crisis that we are seeing has contributed to inflation outstripping wages in 2022. In terms of Treasury’s most recent forecasts, 2022 is the only year in which that is the case, and wage growth is expected to exceed inflation from 2023 onwards.

💬 Nicola Willis: Is he concerned that, far from showing resilience, ANZ’s headline measure of business confidence, out today, is approaching record lows, and does he take any responsibility for the lack of confidence in the economy?

I think the member will be aware that around the world we are seeing consumer confidence reaching very low levels, and New Zealand, of course, is in line with that trend. This is not unique to New Zealand.

💬 Nicola Willis: Can he confirm that, according to the business survey from ANZ, firms are increasingly pessimistic about the outlook for activity and profitability in New Zealand, and does he share their concerns?

I have seen the ANZ study, and as I’ve indicated before, it is in line with surveys around the world that are showing an increased degree of pessimism and lower confidence, both consumer confidence and business confidence, something the Government does, of course, take very seriously. It’s one of the reasons we are committed to addressing some of the underlying causes—for example, the cost of living pressures that New Zealand households face. Those are issues that we are very much focused on addressing.

💬 Nicola Willis: Is he aware that, according to Westpac’s consumer survey, confidence in the economy is at its lowest level since 1988, and doesn’t that show that working New Zealanders have run out of confidence in the prospects for the New Zealand economy while Labour is in charge?

If one scans across all of the different surveys out there at the moment, you could also find examples of where consumer confidence was lower after the global financial crisis, when the National Party was in Government. Overall, there is no question that consumer confidence is lower at the moment. Most people watch the TV news at night and will see what is happening around the rest of the world, and that of course is having an impact.

💬 Nicola Willis: Isn’t it the case that, far from being about what’s happening around the world, the reality is that inflation has outstripped wage growth in New Zealand for 10 of the last 17 quarters, meaning New Zealanders’ real incomes are falling, and that’s why they lack confidence in his Government?

I don’t agree with the member’s assertion in her question. In fact, up until this year, wage growth has been outstripping inflation. After the global financial crisis, there were several periods where wage growth was being outstripped by inflation. That is not unusual when we see economic shocks of the type that we are experiencing at the moment. But the Treasury forecasts indicate that, by next year, we will be back into the position where wage growth will be running ahead of inflation.

💬 Nicola Willis: With mortgage repayment hikes looming for many Kiwi families, what does he say to the New Zealanders who are tightening their belts and bracing for tough times yet are having to watch his Government spend up large at record high rates?

I say to the householders who are following interest rates very closely that they should be fortunate the ACT Party aren’t part of a National Government, because they’re arguing for even higher interest rates.

💬 Nicola Willis: Has he seen the comment by Lance on the Labour Party Facebook page asking, “Why no tax cuts, then? It’s well overdue. The middle class is bleeding.”, and if so, why won’t he commit to giving Kiwis back more of their money so that they can better weather the cost of living crisis?

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Before we go on, there was quite a bit of murmuring on this side while this question was being asked, and I’m going to ask members to stop it.

If that member thinks that giving the highest-income New Zealanders a huge amount of additional funding and giving most working New Zealanders very, very little, which is what the tax cuts being proposed by both the National Party and the ACT Party would deliver, then I think she is utterly wrong.

💬 Nicola Willis: Has he received advice on whether his continuing to claim the New Zealand economy is strong will eventually make it true?

The underlying fundamentals of the New Zealand economy are strong. They are stronger now than they were after the global financial crisis, when Bill English and John Key were calling it “a rock star economy”. There is no question that the cost of living is biting for New Zealanders. That is an international phenomenon. It is one the Government takes seriously.

Question No. 3—Disability Issues

3. to the Minister for Disability Issues: What progress has the Government made in the delivery of the new Ministry for Disabled People?

Budget 2022 underlined the Government’s commitment to deliver change for the disability community by funding the establishment of a new ministry. Tomorrow, I will launch the new Ministry for Disabled People at an event here at Parliament. This will be a historic day that has been 40 years in the making. This will be the first ministry of disabled people in any comparable jurisdiction. It will also be the first ministry with a New Zealand Sign Language name, as well as te reo Māori and English names. The launch of the ministry marks a new chapter for approximately 1.1 million disabled people in New Zealand and is a significant step towards realising true partnership between Government and disabled people—tāngata whaikaha—their whānau, carers, and supporters. It is a privilege to step into this role at such a crucial time for the community and to build on the incredible work of my colleague the Hon Carmel Sepuloni.

💬 Terisa Ngobi: What does the new ministry mean for disabled people?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: The disabled community has waited decades for this moment. That’s why work will continue to ensure the new ministry has the time to get its people and systems established so that it’s well placed to get the transformation right. In the spirit of “Nothing About Us Without Us”, the new ministry will start the ball rolling with ensuring the ministry’s culture and values are mana-enhancing, the governance and partnership arrangements are meaningful, and the mechanisms that will give effect to disabled people’s voices are embedded. The new ministry will also progress transformation of the disability system by progressively applying the Enabling Good Lives approach to disability support services across New Zealand. The three current pilot sites provide an excellent base for a wider roll-out. Over time, more disabled people will have more choice and control, including over funding, to enable them to live great lives.

💬 Terisa Ngobi: What other progress has the Government made to support disabled people?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: The Government’s commitment to supporting the disability community was demonstrated through Budget 2022, with over a billion dollars of new funding for the disability sector. This includes $100 million for the implementation of the Enabling Good Lives approach, $735 million for Disability Support Services, and over $4.8 million to strengthen New Zealand Sign Language and education. This funding marks another step towards creating—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Minister has answered. Further remarks?

Question No. 4—Prime Minister

4. to the Acting Prime Minister: Does he consider that New Zealand is a worse country for young working New Zealanders struggling to pay bills than it was a year ago; if not, does he acknowledge that rents, mortgages, petrol, and grocery prices have increased from a year ago?

on behalf of the Acting Prime Minister: In answer to the first part of the question, the Government has been clear that New Zealand’s economy is facing an extremely tough time as global inflation pressures caused by the war in Ukraine, the Omicron outbreak, and COVID-19 supply chain disruptions push up prices around the globe and here in New Zealand. OECD inflation is averaging 9.2 percent to April, and that is having an impact here in New Zealand. In answer to the second part of the question, yes. Households are facing an extremely tough time due to the impact of these global inflationary pressures. That’s why the Government will continue to support young New Zealanders through targeted policies like the cost of living payment, half-price public transport, $25 increase a week to student allowances, and a reduction in fuel excise duty whilst we continue to invest in infrastructure, education, and health services that young New Zealanders rely on. As we covered in the House last week, in the midst of tough economic times globally, we are well placed. Unemployment is at record lows, and we are in a strong financial position. The easing of border restrictions and opening up to skilled workers and tourists will also help businesses and the economy rebuild.

Brooke van Velden: What are the improvements that outweigh rents increasing by $40 per week in one year under this Government?

As I mentioned before, the Government is very focused on supporting New Zealanders through the increased cost of living, and that includes things like raising the incomes of some of the lowest-paid and lowest-income New Zealanders, things like lifting the minimum wage, things like ensuring that student allowances have been increased—these things will have an impact, as will the winter energy payment and the cost of living payment. But there is no direct one-for-one there.

Brooke van Velden: Is a recent report from Deloitte showing that 45 percent of all New Zealand millennials expect the overall economic situation in New Zealand to worsen—up from 28 percent last year and higher than millennials internationally—a reflection of New Zealanders’ decreasing trust in this Government’s handling of the economy; if not, why not?

No. As I indicated in my answer to a previous question from another Opposition member, we are seeing an overall downward trend in consumer confidence and in people’s optimism about the future at the moment. That is not surprising when you consider the challenges that New Zealanders are facing around the rising cost of living and, of course, the fact that the global pandemic and the winter flu season is having a very significant impact at the moment.

Brooke van Velden: How are young working Kiwis better off this year in comparison to last year, considering new research by economics consultancy Infometrics has found that 2022 is the worst year to be a first-home buyer since 1957 due to house price inflation caused by this Government’s policies?

I say to those young New Zealanders who are affected by the spiralling cost of housing that they have a Government that is committed to addressing the underlying causes of that. For nine years, we had a Government that wasn’t focused on building houses and it denied there was a housing crisis. Our Government acknowledged when we became the Government that we have a housing crisis in New Zealand. That’s not something that you turn around overnight.

Brooke van Velden: Does the Government consider its borrowing and spending has pushed up the price of everything and might just push young working New Zealanders to leave the country?

The biggest driver of inflation is global inflation. In fact, New Zealand’s inflation rate is running below the OECD average.

Question No. 5—Immigration

5. to the Minister of Immigration: Does he believe Government immigration policy over the last two years has put New Zealand in a competitive position to be an attractive destination for migrant nurses; if so, why have more than 800 beds in the aged care sector been closed because of a lack of nurses?

on behalf of the Minister of Immigration: Yes, immigration policy allowed migrant nurses to cross the border when it was closed; around 2,300 nurses did so. Through the immigration rebalance, we are providing a simple and streamlined pathway to residency for nurses coming to New Zealand. For the first time in recent history, our Government has put hospital nurses on the fast track to residency. In answer to the second part of the question, there is no question that we are facing sustained pressure across our health workforce. This is a challenge many other countries are going through as well. As a Government, we recognise this, and through our immigration policy settings we are setting up our workforces for success in the long term.

💬 Erica Stanford: Can the Minister explain how preventing migrant nurses working in New Zealand from reuniting with their partners and children for nearly 18 months while the borders were closed made New Zealand an attractive destination for migrant nurses?

As I’ve just said, our borders were open to nurses from other parts of the world who wanted to come to work here. Even when the borders were closed, of the over 5,000 health workers who came to New Zealand while the borders were closed, more than 2,300 of them were nurses.

💬 Erica Stanford: Point of order, Mr Speaker. My question was not around other nurses coming to New Zealand. It was around nurses in New Zealand being separated from their families—nothing to do with new nurses coming to New Zealand. He did not address the question.

Speaking to the point of order, Mr Speaker, the question was about the attractiveness of New Zealand to nurses from overseas. I addressed that question.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: OK. Well, I might have been distracted a little bit when the question was asked. Can you ask the question again.

💬 Erica Stanford: Can the Minister explain how preventing migrant nurses working in New Zealand from reuniting with their partners and children for nearly 18 months while the borders were closed made New Zealand an attractive destination for migrant nurses?

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: OK. I will get the Minister to respond again.

I have to repeat my answer: New Zealand was an attractive place for nurses, which is why, when the borders were closed, of the more than 5,000 healthcare workers who crossed the border as part of the immigration exemption, more than 2,300 nurses did so.

💬 Erica Stanford: Can the Minister explain how providing dedicated managed isolation and quarantine (MIQ) spots for entertainers, sports teams, and film makers but not nurses until November last year, a few months before MIQ was closed, made New Zealand a more competitive country for attracting migrant nurses?

Again, on behalf of the Minister, when MIQ started, shortly after it commenced operations, it did have places for health workers, including for nurses. It originally set aside a number of places. It was apparent by about the middle of last year—as a consequence of the advocacy of the Minister of Health, it became apparent that, actually, those places were not being set aside for healthcare workers and for nurses, and I’m very thankful for the advocacy of the Minister of Health that persuaded us that we had to get that system right, and we worked with the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment to make sure that we got 300 dedicated places for healthcare workers a month by the end of the year.

💬 Erica Stanford: Can the Minister explain how New Zealand is a desirable destination when migrant nurses here completing their New Zealand nursing training on student visas in 2021 are now blocked from applying for the fast-track resident 2021 visa (R21), despite being now registered nurses working in our health system?

On behalf of the Minister, the 2021 resident visa is open to those who spent a specified period of time here working in their particular profession. So for nurses or other health workers, it will be those particular professions that qualifies them for residency. If they haven’t worked for that specified period of time, then they won’t qualify, but they should continue to take advantage of the student options open to them and to try to seek work and qualify for residency in the way that they previously did.

💬 Erica Stanford: What does he say to the migrant nurse who contacted me last night, who has been in New Zealand for 10 years, completed her nursing training here, is not eligible for R21 because she was on a student visa in September last year, who has now applied to move to Australia because she has to wait another two years for residence via the green list?

On behalf of the Minister, there’s a hodgepodge of, sort of, facts there, some of which contradict each other. If the member wants to raise the case of a specific individual, I’m happy to look at it and consider it against the policy and the policies that have been well notified to all those who are seeking residency in New Zealand.

💬 Erica Stanford: Does he think that there is any correlation between the fact that we are 4,000 nurses short, according to the health Minister, and the Government’s failure to prioritise nurses through immigration settings over the last two years?

We have. This Government, I know for a fact from talking to the Minister of Health, has funded the health system so we have an additional 4,000 nurse places in our health system. There are a number of vacancies currently in the health system, and every effort is being made to recruit nurses into those vacancies from a number of sources—from overseas is one source; internally is another—and every other measure that we can, including graduate nurses being trained here in New Zealand. Every effort is being made to fill those vacancies.

Question No. 6—Economic and Regional Development

6. to the Minister for Economic and Regional Development: What reports has he seen on developments in the New Zealand space sector?

On Tuesday night, Rocket Lab reported it had launched NASA’s Cislunar Autonomous Positioning System Technology Operations and Navigation Experiment, or CAPSTONE, satellite to the moon’s orbit, using its own Electron rocket and Photon lunar spacecraft. This is an extraordinary achievement for Rocket Lab, and New Zealand now joins a very small group of countries that have launched missions to the moon. Peter Beck and the staff of Rocket Lab are a great example of an advanced manufacturing technology and excellence, coupled with entrepreneurial drive, which we have in this country. The tyranny of distance has been a blessing for space launch. With limited air and sea travel to the east, Rocket Lab chose magnificent Māhia Peninsula to establish the world’s first fully private orbital launch facility. I would like to congratulate Peter and the Rocket Lab team, on behalf of the Government, on this outstanding achievement.

💬 Naisi Chen: What benefits, if any, will the CAPSTONE mission bring for New Zealand?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: Other than being an international success story, based in New Zealand, continuing to put our name on the map and the magnificent example of a thriving sector supporting tens of thousands of high-wage jobs, the CAPSTONE mission also involves a new, bespoke collaboration with NASA that will enable a University of Canterbury - led research team to advance development of a technology to track moon-orbiting spacecraft. This is an excellent opportunity for a Kiwi university to lead a technology development project with international significance. The research will be increasingly important as more countries and private actors launch lunar missions. From observatories in Tekapō, our researchers will collaborate with NASA to improve the way we predict spacecraft trajectories.

💬 Naisi Chen: Does the Government have any other collaborations with the space sector?

💬 Hon STUART NASH: The Government has a $26 million investment in the MethaneSAT mission, which will launch a state of the art satellite to detect and measure anthropogenic methane emissions—

💬 Hon Todd McClay: Nothing compared to the methane this member produces.

💬 Hon STUART NASH: —and enable action on slowing climate change—Mr McClay. Rocket Lab will design and build the critical IT infrastructure required to task and position the satellite in space, as well as collect the science data from the satellite. It will also develop, and initially operate, the MethaneSAT mission operation centre, before responsibilities are handed over to the University of Auckland’s Space Institute. Once again, well done to Peter and the Rocket Lab team.

Question No. 7—Trade and Export Growth

7. to the Minister for Trade and Export Growth: Will he advise the Prime Minister to instruct our free trade agreement negotiators to keep talking if the offer from the European Union for dairy and meat exporters is not commercially meaningful for New Zealand, rather than conclude the agreement in Brussels this week?

on behalf of the Minister for Trade and Export Growth: New Zealand seeks the best possible overall outcome from the free-trade agreement (FTA) negotiations, which includes commercially meaningful outcomes for our exporters, including those in the dairy and meat sectors, and it’s worth noting that negotiations on our FTA with the European Union are not yet concluded.

💬 Hon Todd McClay: Can he confirm, as widely reported in the media, that the EU offer for meat and dairy is worse than before negotiations started and is not acceptable to New Zealand?

No, I can’t confirm that. The offer on the table now from the EU has progressed since 2020.

💬 Hon Todd McClay: Is it the case that the current EU offer is for small quotas for dairy and meat exports, with high-end quota tariffs, and would mean that New Zealand dairy and meat would not be competitive in the EU market?

No, I can’t confirm that, but what I can confirm is that our trade negotiations in Brussels right now—the team that’s there, assisted by the Minister and the Prime Minister—are fighting for the best possible deal for New Zealand, including for our major export sectors.

💬 Hon Todd McClay: Isn’t it the case, as the Minister said in December last year, that New Zealand has agreed the EU’s request for geographical indicators, meaning we couldn’t produce our export foods named Parmesan or Gouda or Edam or Feta, for instance, and that we haven’t received any commercially meaningful gains for dairy meat exports in return?

It’s well known that the European Union will not sign free-trade agreements that don’t include outcomes on geographical indicators. But I say to the member that our negotiating team will not sign a free-trade agreement that does not significantly advance the trading position of New Zealand, including in our major export sectors.

💬 Hon Todd McClay: Is he aware that the EU has publicly consulted on banning New Zealanders using the name Kiwi Latina, and will the New Zealand Government agree to this restriction as part of an FTA?

Well, that’s for the EU to comment on; it’s not our position right now, in the middle of delicate negotiations, to comment on their position. I’ll just repeat for the member’s sake again that it’s necessary in any negotiations with the EU on an FTA these days to engage on the question of geographical indicators, but we’re interested in what the total package delivers for New Zealand, including for our major export sectors.

💬 Hon Todd McClay: Does he agree the success of any FTA that New Zealand signs is judged on increased market access, especially for dairy and meat exports, and will he therefore commit to not concluding negotiations with the European Union until a commercially meaningful offer for dairy and meat has been agreed?

Well, I can tell the member again that we will not agree an FTA that doesn’t include commercially meaningful outcomes for dairy and meat exporters in New Zealand. But the EU FTA encompasses a lot more than that that will be valuable for our economy moving into the future.

Question No. 8—Veterans

8. to the Minister for Veterans: What recent policy framework announcement has been made in support of New Zealand veterans affected by mental health and wellbeing issues?

I’m very pleased to announce to the House that, last night, Veterans’ Affairs launched the Veteran, Family and Whānau Mental Health and Wellbeing Policy Framework—Te Arataki mō te Hauora Ngākau mō ngā Mōrehu a Tū me ō rātou Whānau. The policy framework examines the mental health and wellbeing of Aotearoa New Zealand’s veterans, and I congratulate the round table that developed this valuable resource. This document synthesises health and defence evidence and expert knowledge and experiences, and identifies what needs to be done to advance the mental health and wellbeing of veterans and their whānau and family. The 2018 He Ara Oranga report on the Government’s inquiry into mental health and addiction identified New Zealand veterans as being a vulnerable group. However, a framework was never developed to address our veterans’ needs. In 2021, Veterans’ Affairs began the process, bringing together key defence and health organisations, veteran advocacy groups, health practitioners, and veterans to focus on the mental health and wellbeing of veterans and their families. We acknowledge there are mental health problems for our veterans, and we wanted to look at the evidence and identify what New Zealand can do to improve support for the mental health and wellbeing of our veterans and their whānau.

💬 Ibrahim Omer: What does this mean for veterans and their whānau?

💬 Hon MEKA WHAITIRI: This policy framework has been developed with six effective responses for veterans and their whānau: (1) first focus on the prevention and wellbeing promotion; (2) streamline cross-agency responses; (3) increase health provider awareness and education; (4) maintain military connections; (5) meet the needs of the whole family and whānau, not just the veteran; and, (6) support diversity and cultural needs. This resource will help the more than 140,000 veterans, of which a small number will face significant problems resulting from their service: mental health and/or addiction issues, social withdrawal, poverty, homelessness, violence, and suicide. This policy framework will allow Veterans’ Affairs, the Ministry of Health, ACC, Corrections, the Ministry of Social Development, and others to coordinate their response to meet the needs of the veteran and their families.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: That was far too long, that answer.

💬 Ibrahim Omer: Who is this policy framework for?

💬 Hon MEKA WHAITIRI: We encourage a wide range of organisations I’ve listed to utilise this resource. Our veterans do face those personal challenges during their service and the transition to civilian life can be complex compared to life in the service. Most veterans will experience good mental health and make a successful and safe transition; a small number will not. This resource recognises veterans and their families, understands their shared and individually unique experiences, and supports them to maintain and build their mental health and wellbeing.

Question No. 9—Environment (Biodiversity)

9. to the Associate Minister for the Environment (Biodiversity): Can he confirm that the National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity exposure draft contains specific requirements in relation to significant natural areas on Māori land; if so, will these requirements allow more development to take place on Māori land than non-Māori land?

on behalf of the Associate Minister for the Environment (Biodiversity): Yes, and there are also specific requirements for other types of land such as the maintenance of pasture, forestry, and geothermal areas, and all of these allow for existing uses to continue.

💬 Mark Cameron: Why has the Minister established special requirements for significant natural areas on Māori land?

On behalf of the Associate Minister, there are specific requirements for other types of land also, including the maintenance of pasture, forestry, and geothermal areas, and all of these allow for existing uses to continue.

💬 Mark Cameron: What advice has the Minister received, if any, indicating that his Government’s policies would devalue land determined to be a Significant Natural Area?

On behalf of the Associate Minister, I’m not in a position to answer any questions about advice on Government policy. The primary question was about the exposure draft which, on the top of it, says “Not Government policy”.

💬 Mark Cameron: Does the Minister agree that all New Zealanders should be able to develop their lands whether it is Māori land or not?

On behalf of the Associate Minister, questions in general around the use of Māori land are more appropriately asked to the Minister for Māori Development.

💬 Mark Cameron: Point of order, Mr Speaker. The question as framed was whether it was for Māori land or not. What about the other half of that?

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Can you read the question again to me.

💬 Mark Cameron: Thank you, Mr Speaker.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, I’m not asking you to ask it; I want to hear it again so I can make a ruling. Sorry.

💬 Mark Cameron: My apologies. I was trying to make the determination whether the member over there had defined in his answer whether it was Māori land or not, and he spoke to one half of that.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: He’s definitely addressed that.

💬 Mark Cameron: What would the Minister say to Greg, a Tasman farmer who spoke to me about his 600-acre farm, which his family has owned for more than a hundred years, that could be rezoned because of this Government’s proposals, and future generations might lose their right to care for that land?

On behalf of the Associate Minister, I’d say “Gidday, Greg.” and I’d say thank you for the question, and I would say that the member can be reassured, just like his colleagues and other farmers across the county, that existing land use will continue under these proposals.

Question No. 10—Emergency Management

10. to the Minister for Emergency Management: What recent announcements has he made about helping to keep families and communities in Aotearoa New Zealand safer from natural disasters?

This week, I launched the new Monitoring, Alerting and Reporting (MAR) Centre at the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA). New Zealand is prone to many natural hazards, the frequency of which is becoming more regular due to climate change. It is important that we reassure communities and families that the system is robust and there to keep them safe. We need, therefore, 24/7 monitoring of the threats. The new MAR system will monitor, scan, and gather information on emerging threats. It will alert the public, regional civil defence groups, and emergency services and report that information to the Government.

💬 Rachel Boyack: What prompted the Government to establish the centre, and by when?

💬 Hon KIERAN McANULTY: The 2018 ministerial review into better responses to natural disasters and other emergencies included a recommendation for a 24/7 emergency response monitoring system. The previous Minister, the Hon Kris Faafoi, made that commitment and found funding through the Budget, and the process was commenced. It was originally planned to be completed by 2024, but due to the hard work of the NEMA team, that has been brought forward by two years, ahead of schedule and on budget.

💬 Rachel Boyack: How will it make New Zealand safer?

💬 Hon KIERAN McANULTY: Whilst the system has always been robust and has delivered excellent service to New Zealanders, it has relied on an on-call system. This placed an unfair burden on those staff, who had to do a full day’s work, then deal with personal circumstances and realities, and then be on call throughout the night. They delivered that with excellent commitment and dedication, but the time has come for a dedicated, 24/7 monitoring system, which is now, as I say, fully funded and, I’m pleased to say, fully staffed. I’d like to acknowledge the hard work of NEMA for getting this centre up and running ahead of schedule. We thank them very much for their efforts.

Question No. 11—Foreign Affairs

11. to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: Does she consider that her statement earlier this month that deep sea mining “has caused some division between member States of Pacific nation Governments and NGO organisations within their own countries” is now out of date in light of the Governments of Palau, Samoa, and Fiji announcing the Alliance Against Deep Sea Mining at the United Nations Oceans Conference; if not, why not?

I stand by the statement earlier this month. All countries, like New Zealand, are focused on ensuring high standards of environmental protection, and improving our understanding of the deep sea to facilitate this. Palau, Samoa, and Fiji have gone through their own internal processes to reach their position, but they’re not the only countries in the Pacific with an interest in this issue. It is worth reiterating that Pacific Island countries do have differing perspectives on a moratorium.

💬 Hon Eugenie Sage: Has the Minister updated Aotearoa New Zealand’s negotiating mandate ahead of the next International Seabed Authority (ISA) meeting in July; if not, can the Minister confirm to the House that she will do so?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: New Zealand’s approach to the ISA negotiations, which sees us calling for no deep-sea mining to occur without high environmental standards in place, has not changed. We are part of a coalition of members arguing for the highest possible standards of environmental protection. In light of the declarations of Palau, Samoa, and Fiji, we expect this view to be reflected at the July ISA meetings. We remain committed to a multilateral process that is under way at ISA as the best possible chance to deliver. New Zealand’s full and good-faith engagement in ISA processes at this stage provides us with the best chance to influence an effective outcome for the environment that is respected by all States. If the ISA is not able to deliver the highest standards of environmental protection, then we will be calling for no deep-sea mining to occur. As I’ve previously indicated, after the meeting in July, which will be the second round of negotiations, it will be the most appropriate time to undertake a review and review our mandate.

Teanau Tuiono (remote): Does she stand by officials’ advice in 2021 that our approach to deep-sea mining must recognise the mana of each Pacific Island country, and, if so, does she agree that New Zealand’s opposition to an international moratorium on deep-sea mining is now out of step with that advice and needs to be revised?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Yes, the negotiations at the ISA are still in their early stages, and I want to ensure that we’re keeping a watching brief on what is being said across the Pacific in relation to the issues of a moratorium. It remains difficult to assess what is likely to happen as this process continues, but, again, we maintain a watching brief. New Zealand is engaging actively in the ISA processes, with a view to ensuring the effective protection of the marine environment in accordance with the obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). It will be very important to see what progress can be made at the next July ISA meeting. At this early stage, we remain focused on engaging fully and in good faith to push for an effective outcome for the environment that is respected by all States.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: Does the Minister consider the growing call of Pacific States for a global moratorium on deep-sea mining a request for assistance from their international partners, and, if so, does she consider Aotearoa has an obligation to support and uphold the interests of our Pacific relatives?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: We respect the views across the Pacific and know how important this issue is. We also recognise, at this point, that there’s no consensus amongst Pacific nations on this issue of a moratorium on deep-sea mining. Notwithstanding that, New Zealand’s focus is on communicating the risks we see around deep-sea mining, and building on those matters in the region that we can agree on, especially how we ensure key knowledge gaps in our understanding of the deep sea are filled. We consider the first step in filling these gaps is to work as a region to clearly articulate the region’s ocean science priorities to ensure funding and research effort is best targeted. We already fund the Pacific Community Centre for Ocean Science based within the Pacific community and are discussing with them how to do more in this particular area.

💬 Hon Eugenie Sage: Does the Minister agree that international waters outside of any State’s domestic jurisdiction should be protected from environmental destruction for the common good of everyone on the planet, and if so, will she commit Aotearoa New Zealand to supporting a moratorium of deep-sea mining under the high seas?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: UNCLOS sets out the legal framework within which all activities in the oceans and seas must be carried out. New Zealand has a longstanding in-principle commitment to UNCLOS, which we view as vital to the security and prosperity of New Zealand and the wider Pacific region. UNCLOS provides that deep-sea mining cannot take place unless the effective protection of the marine environment can be ensured. We’re engaging actively in the ISA processes with a view to ensuring the effective protection of the marine environment in accordance with the obligations under UNCLOS. To that end, we’ve been vocal in our calls for no deep-sea meaning to proceed without robust environmental protections. As I’ve said previously, once a number of considerations have taken place, once we understand the broadening position of the Pacific on these matters, I’ll seek to review our position and mandate in July.

Question No. 12—Justice

12. to the Minister of Justice: Does she stand by all her actions and statements?

Yes, I do, and in particular I stand by my statement earlier this week that money talks. And money talks when it comes to investments, and investments that this Government has made, particularly when it comes to victims. Over the last four Budgets, this side of the House has invested a total amount of $130.183 million in support for our victims. Over the last four Budgets of National—Budget ’17, nil; Budget ’16, nil; Budget ’15, nil; Budget ’14, nil. On this side of the House, yes, we believe in the rights of victims, and we’re prepared to put our money where our mouth is.

💬 Chris Penk: Does the Minister think that she’ll be more successful in obtaining support services funding for victims than previous Ministers of Justice under this Government?

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Certainly under the last Government!

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: Certainly more than the last Government.

💬 Chris Penk: Point of order. My question was very specifically in relation to previous Ministers of Justice under this Government. I don’t believe that was even nearly addressed.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: You can ask it again.

💬 Chris Penk: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Same supplementary: does the Minister think that she will have more success in advocating for funding for supporting victims than the previous Ministers of Justice under this Government?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: The previous Ministers of Justice on this side of the House—as I’ve said, incrementally, every single year, there has been an uplift in the amount of funding that has gone to victims. Budget ’18, $13.467 million; Budget ’19, $43.986 million; Budget 2020, $3.038 million; Budget 2022, $66.6 million. I go back to the ACT and National record on investment into victims: Budget ’17, nil—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Minister has answered.

💬 Chris Penk: How is it that the Minister can claim that her Government has provided better services for victims when court cases lasting longer than 16 months involving victims of serious crime have leapt from 900 to approximately 3,000, more than tripling under this Government?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: Look, as I’ve said, the focus on victims is critical, and we are taking an all-of-Government approach to the way that we are dealing particularly with victims of serious crime, but what I will note just briefly is that one of the biggest issues that has pillared and impinged upon the courts’ ability to be able to do what they need to do to process victims through the courts has been the impacts of COVID.

💬 Chris Penk: Why should non-fatal strangulation victims be assured by her statement that “The focus of this Government is to join up the siloed parts of the justice system.” when over 1,600 missed out on support due to the Government’s failure to deliver a cross-agency strangulation initiative, as announced in Budget 2020?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: As the member will be well aware, there has been significant investment by this Government to ensure that there is an all-of-Government response to victims of crime, whether that’s in the way we are approaching the way that we deal with victims when it comes to their experiences through the court. We’ve had a significant uplift in terms of victim support advisers going through the court. There’s been significant uplift in terms of the amount of funding that is going directly to victims of crime. There’s been a focus on the way that we’re ensuring all agencies come into the courtroom and provide support through experiences, and that’s in particular through Te Ao Mārama. So, to his point, I refute the proposition in his question.

💬 Chris Penk: Why does the Minister think the outcomes for victims have been getting worse under this Government, including prior to the period of COVID-19 disruption?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: There’s no evidence to show that that’s the case.

💬 Chris Penk: Point of order. I did point out a number of different statistics that the Minister has accepted. So I don’t believe that she’s addressed the question in merely rejecting the premise of the question.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: I think it has actually been addressed, in my opinion.