Oral Questions

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

Yes, particularly the Government’s decision to extend the reductions to fuel excise duty, road-user charges, and half price public transport by more than five months until the end of January next year. Petrol and diesel prices have increased by 32 percent and 74 percent respectively in the year to June 2022, as the global economy enters this new phase of the pandemic and ongoing impact of the Russian invasion of Ukraine is felt. Extending the 25c per litre reduction reduces the cost of filling up a 40 litre tank of petrol by over $11 and, for a 60 litre tank, over $17. Half price public transport sees an average person save $25 a week. From Monday, New Zealanders will start to receive the cost of living payment to help them through the peak of the global inflation storm. An estimated 2.1 million people aged 18 and over are eligible for an extra $27 per week over a three-month period, paid in monthly instalments. There is no easy fix for the cost of living, but we’re taking a range of actions to ease the pressure on families.

💬 David Seymour: Does the Prime Minister accept that those three policies of extending the fuel excise and road-user discounts, the public transport subsidies, and the cost of living payment will make the Government’s deficit larger than it would have otherwise been, therefore increasing the fiscal impulse and adding—rather than reducing—inflation to the New Zealand economy?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Two responses: the first is that, of course, Treasury has already—and this is in the public domain—made clear their position that it is possible that certain forms of untargeted stimulus that particularly is putting money into people’s wallets, if it is untargeted and long term—like for instance a tax cut for those on $180,000 or more, or perhaps the kinds of tax cuts proposed by the ACT Party—yes, would be inflationary. Of course the cost of living payment is targeted and short term. I also—generally, when it comes to Government spending—would refer to the statements made by the Treasury at the time of the Budget, which talked about the fiscal impulse for each year being slightly more contractory than forecast at the half-year update, as the Government’s year-on-year contribution to aggregate demand decreases more relative to each preceding year, indicating that, overall, fiscal policy is dampening inflation pressures.

💬 David Seymour: So do those three policies of extending the fuel excise and road-user charge discount, subsidising public transport, and a cost of living payment add to the Government’s deficit, and therefore make the fiscal impulse and inflation larger than it would otherwise be?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Again, I refer to the first answer that I provided. Secondly, I would point to the fact that, when it comes to Government spending overall, we have maintained the position of reducing down, of course, Crown spending relative to GDP and have kept it relatively in line with previous Governments, and it is set to return again to that as a percentage. And finally, I would also point out the fact that we are looking to return to surplus a year earlier than, for instance, the National Government after the global financial crisis, and many would argue that this is a larger and more impactful economic crisis.

💬 David Seymour: Does she believe that her finance Minister’s monetary policy remit to the Reserve Bank is timely and specific enough in its goals for returning to under 3 percent inflation and, if so, how would she define the “medium term”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: In answer to the first part of the member’s question, of course, when it comes to the remit around inflation, that remains unchanged. We, of course, after previous reviews, have added the role of the Reserve Bank looking at unemployment. We are not the only country, of course, to have dual mandates, but it is still for the Reserve Bank and its implementation of monetary policy to achieve those goals and those dual mandates.

💬 David Seymour: So is the remit to the Reserve Bank specific and timely enough, and, if so, how would she define “medium term”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: When the member asked whether it is specific and timely enough, of course, it is set down that we have these reviews of their remit. They are going through that process. Whether or not the member believes this will give an opportunity for the Reserve Bank to look at some of its monetary policy through COVID, well, that is ultimately a decision for the bank. They are not constrained in their ability to review their own decisions and use of monetary policy through that period. The review of the remit is a specific process that is already set down.

💬 David Seymour: Does the Prime Minister stand by her decision to visit the UK, Spain, and Australia, opening up opportunities for New Zealanders to live and work more easily in those countries, and, if she does, was she dismayed that migrants worldwide picked New Zealand as the second-worst place in the world to migrate to, under her Government, while she was away?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I stand by ensuring that New Zealanders have opportunities to increase their skills and, of course, bring those skills back to New Zealand, an opportunity that, I note, the member took up—I believe, residing for a period in Canada—in the same way that I did. New Zealanders have consistently asked for, though, increasing access to the UK through the working holiday visa. That is what we have fulfilled, and I note that it has been widely welcomed.

💬 David Seymour: Will the Prime Minister accept that there is a labour crisis in New Zealand right now, with sectors from schools to hospitals to horticultural harvesters screaming out for workers, and, if she does accept that, why does she think it has happened?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The member references the skills shortages that, I note, many countries are experiencing presently, and that was one of the things that I took out of the time that I spent in the UK and Australia. They are experiencing similar issues. In the UK, I saw some estimates being reported recently of up to 50,000 nurses short of what is required to fulfil their needs within the NHS. The question is: what can we do about it? We’ve worked very hard on ensuring that we encourage those who are already registered, for instance, in New Zealand to return to the nursing workforce. We’ve done a lot of work to increase those who are in the construction and housing sector. We’ve increased the number of apprentices. We’ve subsidised employers to take apprentices on. We’ve made the first year of trades training and post-secondary education free. We’ve created the accredited employers scheme to make it easier to access and to go through the immigration process. We’re not the only one, but we are doing things to improve the flow of skilled labour into New Zealand.

💬 Hon Michael Wood: Does the Prime Minister think that labour force pressures would be eased by policies such as lowering wages for migrant workers and lowering the minimum wage?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I do note that those are amongst some of the policies of ACT. I also do not believe that we will be able to answer some of those domestic skills gaps that we have in New Zealand if we were to make it more expensive to train and get post-secondary skills. And that is exactly what the ACT Party has proposed.

💬 David Seymour: Does the Prime Minister accept that practically every sector in New Zealand is facing a critical labour shortage, and, if so, why does Immigration New Zealand require each and every accredited employer to individually demonstrate that there’s a labour shortage for them with their own labour market test?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: And once they’re an accredited employer, they go through a shortened process, to ease what previously had been a very bureaucratic process. But, if the member is arguing that we should return to the policy of old, where we have no regard to our own domestic workforce, we do not work with our sectors to increase the training of New Zealanders, we have no regard to whether or not we have the infrastructure or housing to support a growth in population—in fact, our entire economic strategy is growth in population and growth in housing prices—that is not a strategy that is good for New Zealanders, and that is why we have changed it.

💬 David Seymour: Why does the Prime Minister defend immigration policies set up when hundreds of thousands were queuing at the border still when those queues ain’t there, the world’s changed, and New Zealand is desperate for workers?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Because I reject the claims that the member is making. Our goal, and indeed our policy, is to support employers who are seeking levels of skills that we do not have access to in New Zealand and to make it easier for those employers. Where we are putting in greater tests is where we have traditionally seen lower-skilled, low-wage work, which does not help the rest of our overall population if we continue to seek low-skilled migrant activity in New Zealand. It’s not good for migrants; it’s not good for New Zealand.

💬 SPEAKER: Before we go on to the next question, I am going to remind people in the gallery that being there is a privilege and part of the rules are that people wear masks. The masks should be worn over noses and certainly not as necklaces, as, in some cases, they are being.

Question No. 2—Finance

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

Statistics New Zealand reported last week that the Consumers Price Index for the June quarter was up 1.7 percent, taking the annual rate to 7.3 percent. This level of inflation is putting pressure on households in meeting their costs of living. The quarterly rate of 1.7 percent was lower than the March quarter and economists believe that June will represent the peak of the inflation cycle, albeit that inflation is expected to remain elevated above the levels we’ve seen in recent years, for some time. New Zealand is not the only country experiencing higher prices driven by global factors. Inflation is at 9.4 percent in the UK, 9.1 percent in the United States, 8.1 percent in Canada, and at an average of 9.6 percent across the OECD. We are well positioned to support New Zealanders dealing with the global cost of living pressures, thanks to our economic plan and responsible fiscal management that have delivered record low unemployment and debt levels that are among the lowest in the OECD.

💬 Barbara Edmonds: What steps is the Government taking in response to the impact of global cost of living pressures on the economy?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The Government is acutely aware that many New Zealanders are doing it tough, and we are taking action to support them. We’ve boosted the incomes of seniors, students in low-income families, while a million New Zealanders are receiving the winter energy payment. From next Monday, the targeted cost of living payment will deliver around $27 a week for low and middle income New Zealanders aged 18 years and over who don’t get the winter energy payment. In response to high fuel prices, which have been significantly driven by the war in the Ukraine, we have cut the fuel excise duty and road-user charges, and halved public transport costs. Last week, we extended these reductions until the end of January next year to give people certainty over the coming months as prices continue to move around at the pump. As we’ve acknowledged many times in this House, 2022 is a tough year and it is a volatile and uncertain environment for Kiwis. However, we are in a strong position to deal with this and we are supporting those most in need.

💬 Barbara Edmonds: What measures are being taken to address the underlying causes of high prices and its impact on the economy?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: We are doing what we can to ensure New Zealanders are paying a fair price. For example, we’re taking action in the supermarket sector to boost competition and get better outcomes at the checkout, we’re closely monitoring margins in the fuel market to make sure savings are being passed on at the pump, and we are looking to the longer term by reducing our dependence on volatile commodities like oil by decarbonising our transport fleet, including through initiatives like the clean car discount. We have also put in place our immigration reset to allow us to attract workers to get the skills we need. And we have restarted schemes such as the working holiday visas to help the recovery in tourism and hospitality. The Commerce Commission is carrying out a market study into building materials and this will confirm what many New Zealanders believe, I am sure—that we do pay too much for our building supplies—and we do need to take action in this space as well. There is no single or easy solution when it comes to cost of living pressures and the impact of the global inflation spike here in New Zealand, but we will continue to support New Zealanders to respond to these challenging times.

Question No. 3—Prime Minister

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

Yes, in particular the Government’s recent work to reconnect with the world, including recent trade missions and business delegations to Japan, Singapore, Australia, and the United States of America. Supporting New Zealand businesses to access these large and important international markets has helped to promote a number of trade and tourism opportunities that will support our trade recovery strategy. Trade delegations have included representatives for New Zealand’s dairy, Māori businesses, food and beverage, technology, tourism, and energy sectors. In addition, during a recent trip to Europe the Government signed a major free-trade deal with the European Union which will see export revenue to the EU to grow by up to $1.8 billion annually on full implementation. This free-trade agreement (FTA) builds on the UK FTA the Government recently signed, which will see a boost in New Zealand’s GDP estimated between $700 million and $1 billion. This work by the Government is key to supporting our economic development and trade agenda.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Can she confirm that inflation has now been above the 1 to 3 percent target for 15 straight months?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Obviously the member himself can see where inflation levels are sitting, but I would also point out that there had been periods where not only has it sat within those bounds, we’ve also seen—importantly for us as a Government—wages consistently outstrip inflation. That of course remains an important goal for us and we are set to see that trend return in the incoming period.

💬 Christopher Luxon: When should Kiwis struggling with record increases in the cost of living expect inflation to be back below 3 percent?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Again, this is all forecasting. It’s incredibly difficult at this period of time to, with specificity, determine where inflation is likely to land. Because, as much as there is a crystal-ball gazing and a lot of revisionist history on the other side of the House, we all remember that it wasn’t that long ago that we expected double-digits unemployment and a potential collapse in the housing market. That is not what has occurred, and instead we see, the world over, significant increases and inflation. The member will see the same forecasts I do—the predictions that we will see it begin to decline but still remain higher than we usually have it in New Zealand, but it will then continue to trend down. But again, they’re forecasts.

💬 Christopher Luxon: What impact, if any, does she believe Government spending of $127 billion in the coming year—$50 billion more than just five years ago—will have on inflation and interest rates?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Again, here, I just again point the member to the fact that New Zealand is not alone in this experience. The fact that the member keeps coming back to the decisions made by the Labour Government in New Zealand, in my mind, tends to lend itself to an argument that we are the only ones having this experience currently. Canada, the UK, the United States, Australia’s on the up; you even see in the likes of Korea, in parts of Asia, very similar increases in inflation, either at the same rate we are or higher, or trending up. Again, I refer back to my earlier answer on what Treasury has said around the Government spending, and I would also point the member to the fact that a large amount of our spending in the last Budget was on cost pressures. And I ask him again, what will he cut?

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: What goes? What goes? What goes?

💬 Christopher Luxon: We can give you a list.

💬 Hon Dr Megan Woods: Well, do—we’re waiting.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Does she agree with—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! Order! Two things: one, there shouldn’t be any chipping from over here. But, two, the Prime Minister shouldn’t ask someone who is not in the position to answer questions.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Does she agree with former Reserve Bank Governor Graeme Wheeler, who said global supply chains and the Ukraine war “are not in any way the main drivers of inflation”; if not, why not?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I’ve seen a number of opinions and reckons on the current global situation, and I’ve seen a number of views on what different central banks should be doing.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Was former Reserve Bank Governor Graeme Wheeler wrong when he said, “The main reason why we’ve had this surge in inflation is the extraordinary monetary and fiscal stimulus that’s been applied”; if so, why?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Again, I’ve also seen a number of different views on the contributing factors to what we are currently seeing. What I can see now is the member is now acknowledging a global set of circumstances. Again, our job is to make sure we can do what we can to support New Zealanders through this period. I also do not resile from the decisions that we have made to support businesses who went through an extraordinary time—extremely tough—and I totally reject any suggestion that they showed anything other than resilience.

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: Can the Prime Minister confirm that there was widespread support for the fiscal measures to support businesses and households through COVID-19, including calls from some for more support than what the Government gave?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Yes, I absolutely recall that and of course I stand firm on the view that the decisions, for instance, around monetary policy and the decisions by the Reserve Bank are their decisions—they are independent. But the line of questioning from the member Christopher Luxon today suggests to me that he believes we should have had higher interest rates through that period.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Will she back National’s call for an independent public inquiry into the Reserve Bank’s monetary policy response from March 2020 until late 2021; if not, why not?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I mean, firstly, the first principle here, I would argue, of course, is the independence of the Reserve Bank. The second point I would argue is that the member’s question suggests that there isn’t the possibility to scrutinise the decisions of the Reserve Bank and the governor at different points. The governor goes to the Finance and Expenditure Committee, if I recall, every three months. Every decision is subject to scrutiny, and, of course, separately. The remit has a statutory review currently under way, which there is the possibility for submissions on. There are ample opportunities to raise these kinds of questions.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Would the Prime Minister welcome a review into the economic response to COVID-19, say, by the Finance and Expenditure Committee, that I’ve been calling for for the past five months?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I actually refer here to an answer that was given by, at the time, the Minister for COVID-19 Response: there have been ample inquiries, reviews, and analysis across the COVID-19 response. Does that mean that there isn’t more that we should reflect on in what has been one of the most significant health and economic crises that we as a nation have experienced? Yes, there will be. But I think it’s about making sure we do it at the right time in the right and most effective way. We are still in the middle of a response—particularly through winter—so it is about making sure that we choose the most appropriate time.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Is she concerned that relying on the Reserve Bank to review its own performance is unlikely to be as robust as an independent inquiry, and don’t Kiwis deserve to understand how Government policy has contributed to the cost of living crisis?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Here, I believe, the member is asking me: do I think that we should maintain the independence of the Reserve Bank? Yes, we should.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Is she really saying it’s impossible to assess the performance of the Reserve Bank without compromising its independence?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The board, of course, has a role here, as does a number of other opportunities for the Parliament to add the scrutiny. Again, there seems to be—also the other point that I would make here is that there seems to be a lot of hindsight and revisionist positioning here.

💬 Christopher Luxon: It’s costing us a lot of money. Why won’t the Government agree to look critically at its own mistakes and do everything possible to prevent a repeat of the current situation, where Kiwis are suffering because—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! I’m going to ask the member to rephrase his question right from the beginning.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Why won’t the Government agree to look critically at its own performance and do everything possible to prevent a repeat of the current situation?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Because the member is asking us to resile from all of the support that kept people in jobs, that kept businesses operating, and that made sure we supported our health system, and there are always things we could do better and we will always be willing to reflect back on them. But do I resile from the support that was provided to the New Zealand businesses who kept our people in jobs? No. And will I ever call them soft? Never.

Question No. 4—Conservation

4. to the Minister of Conservation: Does she stand by the Government’s position in the 2017 Speech from the Throne that there will be no new mines on conservation land; if so, when does the Government plan to implement a ban?

Yes. Earlier this term, we announced a significant work programme to reclassify 2.5 million hectares of stewardship land as a means to further protect land with conservation and cultural values. Stewardship land makes up about 9 percent of New Zealand’s land area, with almost 30 percent of the land administered by the Department of Conservation. The reclassification of stewardship land is an important step to protect conservation values from the adverse effects of activities on conservation land, which includes mining. There is still a process to work through to further develop and fully implement the broader policies of having no new mines. As a Government, we remain committed to ensuring mining only happens where and when appropriate, and according to robust regulatory standards. This includes properly protecting the biodiversity, cultural, historical, and scientific values found from public conservation land.

💬 Hon Eugenie Sage: Will she consider establishing a moratorium on new mining activity on or under conservation land until the review of stewardship land is completed, as a step towards implementing the commitment in the 2017 Speech from the Throne; if not, why not?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: What I can commit to is the work that we are currently doing with regards to stewardship land and the policy objectives. Because what this means is with 16 percent of the West Coast, for example, of the South Island likely to be reclassified as national park, this will mean that new access arrangements to mine Crown-owned land may no longer be granted on that land.

💬 Hon Eugenie Sage: Does she support blasting and mining for gold under the habitat of an ancient and threatened species such as Archey’s frog—which is very sensitive to vibration—as OceanaGold wants to do with its Wharekīrauponga mine in Coromandel?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: We all know that Archey’s frogs are at risk. That application is before the council at the moment and may or may not be publicly—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! Sorry, I think the member’s trying to refer to something which is before some other judicial body, which she’s allowed to do. But I want to listen really carefully to it, and I can’t if there’s so much noise from my left.

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr Speaker. The application is before councils to make a decision on whether that will require resource consent and be publicly notified. If that is the case, I have been assured by the Department of Conservation that they are working through the pile of information that has been submitted with that application, and they will be making a submission to that consent application.

💬 Hon Eugenie Sage: Will the department be free to make the submissions it would like to under the Resource Management Act on OceanaGold’s proposed Wharekīrauponga mine—unlike under a previous National Government, when the Minister influenced departmental submissions?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: I take my role seriously with regards to this, and I am working alongside officials in this particular matter.

💬 Hon Eugenie Sage: Does the Minister agree that with a biodiversity crisis, there is a need to act with urgency to ensure that conservation land and the habitats and ecosystems it supports are protected from the impacts of new mining activity?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: I stand by the work that the Department of Conservation are doing, given that the process that has brought us to the reclassification of stewardship land has taken nearly 30 years, and I applaud the work that they are doing in this regard.

💬 Chris Bishop: Point of order, Mr Speaker.

💬 SPEAKER: Question No. 5—sorry, a point of order.

💬 Chris Bishop: I wonder if you could go away and just reflect on one of the supplementaries—I think it was the second to last supplementary from the Hon Eugenie Sage—then in relation to an assertion in the supplementary question about the actions of a former National Government with regards to the Department of Conservation. Sir, you’ve been very hot on the fact that members are not allowed to assert things as fact that aren’t, in fact, facts in supplementary questions. That clearly was an example of that, and it wasn’t brought up by you.

💬 SPEAKER: I don’t think I need to go away and look at it. Speaker’s ruling 191/2, I think it was, makes it clear that other parties shouldn’t be brought in unnecessarily into questions. I did think about it, but then I thought about the actual principle of what was being said, and Ministers giving their department’s opinions or instructions is not what I would see as a negative thing; it’s what their job is.

Question No. 5—Housing

5. to the Minister of Housing: What action is the Government taking to enable more homes to be built across New Zealand?

Last week, I announced the first seven successful projects to be funded by the Infrastructure Acceleration Fund (IAF), the Government’s $1 billion contestable fund. Through these IAF investments, we are laying the groundwork for thousands of new homes across Aotearoa by providing much-needed funding for essential housing infrastructure like roads, pipes, flood management, and other key infrastructure. But this is just the beginning. We have to build our way out of the national housing crisis we inherited, and we’re working closely with councils and developers to progress further investments to enable more development of homes where they are most needed.

💬 Terisa Ngobi: Which areas are set to benefit from the first announcement of IAF funding?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Seven centres will benefit from the first round of IAF funding, including Rotorua, Ōmokoroa, Napier, Kaikōura, Gisborne, New Plymouth, and, of course, Ōtaki. The IAF process means that we get the best value for our investment, rather than a blunt, one-size-fits-all approach. In Ōtaki, an application from Māori land owners, the Kāpiti Coast District Council, and private developers will see $29.3 million of IAF funds committed to upgrading water supply and roading, enabling an estimated 1,000 papa kāinga affordable and market homes. In Rotorua, we are investing $85 million in stormwater solutions which the Rotorua Lakes district council considers will enable over 3,000 homes in an intensification project.

💬 Terisa Ngobi: What responses has the Minister seen to the announcement?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: The Mayor of the Kāpiti Coast District said the Government’s IAF announcement was a “transformational investment” for a community in need of housing. The Mayor of Western Bay of Plenty, receiving almost $38.4 million for the Ōmokoroa intersection, said, “After being [proposed] by various Government’s over a 12-year period, to finally have it delivered, I wouldn’t say it’s miraculous but it’s a word similar to that.” And the Mayor of Rotorua said, “Government coming in with this [investment] is eyewatering. It brings it forward, and we can get going. It’s great news for Rotorua. We have to build our way out of this housing crisis.”

Question No. 6—Finance

6. to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with ANZ that “it’s clear that New Zealand has a serious home-grown domestic inflation problem that needs to be dealt with”; if so, what steps, if any, other than temporary reductions to fuel excise and a temporary cost of living payment, is he taking to deal with this problem?

In answer to the first part of the member’s question, it is worth noting this quote was in an article by ANZ saying that the June quarter’s 7.3 annual inflation rate looks to be the peak in the current cycle. I do agree that our current inflation rate needs to be dealt with, and that’s why the Government, at least, supports an independent Reserve Bank which has the tools to deal with this, just as every other central bank in the developed world is looking to do. To answer the second part of the member’s question, I thank her for her acknowledgment of the important role of the cuts to fuel excise duty and the cost of living payment for helping New Zealanders to deal with the current inflation spike. To bring the member up to date on some other steps—and at the risk of incurring the Speaker’s wrath—we have introduced or are continuing an equivalent reduction in road-user charges; half-price public transport until 31 January next year and then permanently for community services card holders from 1 February; increases to Working for Families, superannuation, student allowances, and main benefits, which kicked in from 1 April, on top of increases in earlier years; indexation of benefit payments to the average wage; working with the supermarket sector so that Kiwis finally get a fair—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! I am looking down at the lengths of what the member has in front of him, and I think he’s done enough.

💬 Nicola Willis: Does the Minister understand that the measures he’s just outlined address the symptoms but not the causes of domestic inflation, and what is he doing to address the surge in domestic non-tradeable and core inflation?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Just to take one example, one of the things I mentioned was the work that we are doing in the supermarket sector. For too long, across many Governments, New Zealanders have paid too much for their food as a result of not having sufficient competition in the sector and not giving people a fair go in areas like the wholesale market. The Government—this Government—is addressing that.

💬 Nicola Willis: Does the Minister understand what non-tradeable core inflation is, and if so, could he explain why he thinks the prices of hairdressing and personal grooming services have increased by 6.1 percent in the past year, and any relationship that has with the war in Ukraine?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Obviously for the member’s benefit, when we talk about non-tradeables and domestic, they are not necessarily the same thing. We don’t break non-tradeables down by their inputs, for example. So if we were to take one example: building materials, which significantly contribute to issues around housing within inflation, 90 percent of the construction products that are used in New Zealand come in from offshore. Yet that is counted within non-tradeables.

💬 Nicola Willis: Would the Minister care to explain why rents have increased by the highest on record in the inflation series?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Well, the member opposite might be able to help me with that, which is the fact that houses weren’t built under her Government’s watch, to the extent that we have had to play catch-up, so that supply of rentals are simply not there. That is not to undermine the fact that many New Zealanders, including those who rent, are doing it tough at the moment, and that’s why this Government has been providing support to low and middle income New Zealanders rather than proposing tax cuts for the most wealthy.

💬 Nicola Willis: Has the Minister noted the stance of the incoming Australian Labor Government, who have outlined $11.5 billion in budget reductions, stating, “[They cannot] throw money around and [...] be blind to the consequences.”, and when will he start applying some fiscal discipline in New Zealand?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: In the Budget that the Government put down in May, we outlined a path that would see expenditure as a percentage of GDP return to the long-run average of around 30 percent. It always takes a careful balance when putting a Budget like this together. What this side of the House won’t be doing is claiming that we can—at the same time—cut taxes, reduce debt, and increase spending. Paul Goldsmith’s Bermuda Triangle is alive and well in the National Party.

💬 Nicola Willis: Does he consider that the Reserve Bank’s money-pumping decisions have, in any way, contributed to record-high inflation, and, if so, why isn’t he prepared to expose its decision making to independent scrutiny?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The Prime Minister has already covered this in answers that she gave earlier on. The Reserve Bank’s decisions are already open to independent scrutiny on a very regular basis including by the member at the Finance and Expenditure Committee. What I can commit this side of the House to is respecting the independence of the Reserve Bank and also sticking by the position that we had on fiscal policy—unlike the member’s party, who are flip-flopping around and are now telling New Zealanders that, should we ever, God forbid, end up in another pandemic situation, they can’t be relied on to support businesses and households.

💬 David Seymour: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Just reflecting on Speaker’s ruling 191-2, which you mentioned earlier, it says you cannot, as a Minister, bring a political party into an answer when they have not been mentioned in the questioning. I’m wondering how Paul Goldsmith’s Bermuda Triangle, or any other of National’s alleged policies, were relevant in that answer. Is that not a breach of 191-2?

💬 SPEAKER: No, it’s not.

Question No. 7—Police

7. to the Minister of Police: What recent announcements has the Government made on tackling gangs and intimidating behaviour across New Zealand?

Last week, the Hon Kiri Allan and I announced a suite of measures to help police respond to gang violence and intimidating behaviour in New Zealand. Recent brazen gang activities have been totally unacceptable and our communities deserve better. Police asked for legislative changes that will give them more tools to crack down on violent offending, and the Government has responded to that. We’ve announced a balanced package based on evidence of what will work.

💬 Ginny Andersen: What will these targeted measures include, and why are they necessary?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The targeted measures include a new offence in the Crimes Act that could carry a penalty of up to five years in prison if a firearm is discharged with the intent to intimidate; providing police with additional search powers targeting gang members during a gang conflict; ensuring police can seize stashes of cash; helping them to crack down on money-laundering by adding more valuable items to the list of high-value goods that are prohibited to cash sale; and expanding the range of offences that could result in the impoundment of cars, motorbikes, and other vehicles. We want to hit the gangs where it hurts by taking their guns, their cars, and their motorbikes and making it harder for them to launder money. [Multiple members interject]

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

💬 Ginny Andersen: What feedback has he received since these measures were announced?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The Police Association welcome the announcement, saying—and I quote—“the Government is obviously listening to Police and has picked up on several key concerns around gang intimidation and illegal gang accumulation of wealth.” Crime and justice expert Jarrod Gilbert also commented on the measures, citing that the creation of a new firearms offence would likely fill a gap in existing legislation by strengthening penalties available, and it appears eminently sensible. It is worth noting, however, that the support for the package has not been unanimous, and we’ve had less favourable feedback on the measures from associates of organisations such as the Mongrel Mob, Black Power, and the National Party.

💬 Ginny Andersen: What further work is being explored to help prevent crime in New Zealand?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: While the tools that I’ve outlined will help the police to keep communities safe, there is also work under way across agencies to address some of the drivers of crime, in particular the drivers of youth crime.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Truancy. It’s getting worse all the time.

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: We know that early intervention, rehabilitation, and reintegration has the most effective route to sustain long-term harm reduction. I agree with Paul Goldsmith that school attendance is one of the things we need to be focused on; it’s a shame the last Government made such a hash of it.

Question No. 8—Prime Minister

8. to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by all her Government’s statements and policies?

Yes.

💬 Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: How can she stand by her Government’s policies on the rising costs of essentials for whānau, such as kai, given that food prices rose by 1.2 percent in June and are 6.6 percent higher than a year ago?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Because, of course, we are working very hard as a Government—where we have the ability to—to ensure that we are bringing down those costs where they are related to systemic issues like, for instance, competition in our grocery sector. You can see we’ve been very forthright in that area, undertaking the market study with the Commerce Commission and working to very quickly to implement their findings. We hold deep concerns around the impact of lack of competition in New Zealand and the fact that it is impacting on whānau thorough food prices. Secondly, you can see with our cost of living payment, which comes in on 1 August, we are producing a time-limited payment to try and ease the burden of the cost of living increases for this period on whānau—$350 for anyone on $70,000 or less. We hope that, too, will have an impact.

💬 Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: What is her response to the 76 percent of people who in a recent poll said they supported Te Paati Māori’s policy to remove GST on kai, which would offset the impact of inflation on food prices?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I’m really genuine in the consideration that we have given this issue, because you will have seen that in the past, the Labour Party has policies around, for instance, GST on things like fresh fruit and vegetables. There have been concerns all the way through whenever such policies are raised that it cannot be guaranteed that such reductions will be passed on in the long term to consumers and whānau—and I genuinely hold that concern, particularly given some of what we’ve seen the Commerce Commission point out is happening within our grocery sector. The second concern is just the fact that we have a very simple, broad-based GST system. So what have we been doing instead? Trying to lift the incomes of families. That’s income increases through the minimum wage, our commitments to public servants receiving a living wage, the increases in main benefit rates—and you can see the significant impact we’ve had there—and family tax credit, which goes to working and non-working New Zealanders. All of these things are designed to give greater dignity to New Zealanders to determine their own decisions in addressing their family needs.

💬 Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: What is she doing about the fact that the People’s Inquiry into Student Wellbeing found that tertiary students spend more than half of their income on rent, and two-thirds of students can’t afford basics such as food, bills, and healthcare?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Obviously, this is an area where we have been making changes because we’ve identified that there is a need to increase the support for our students. That’s why we made the first year of post-secondary education free. Apprenticeships are also free. We’ve also increased student support since 2017—it represents, roughly, a 50 percent increase in the amount that students who are eligible are receiving—and also their ability to borrow. We have made changes. We accept that there is more to do, but the changes we’ve made have been significant.

💬 Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Does she agree with Bernard Hickey that Governments should call on boards and company owners to return as much of the $20 billion in COVID cash handouts as they no longer need to fund anti-poverty programmes, given that the handouts, the money printing, pushed up asset values of households and businesses by $824 billion?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: We simply ask those who sought the Government’s support that was available to make sure that they complied with the conditions that we set down. That, of course, is, obviously, what we asked of those who were ultimately required to pass on, for instance, things like the wage subsidy to ensure that they maintained a connection between their employees to the job market. You can see the difference that it made.

Question No. 9—Biosecurity

9. to the Minister for Biosecurity: What measures are being taken by the Government to protect the country from foot-and-mouth disease?

Over the past month, I have instructed officials to take a number of measures additional to the already robust biosecurity system we have in place in order to protect New Zealand’s economy from foot-and-mouth disease. After the announcement of foot-and-mouth outbreak in Indonesia, we launched a foot-and-mouth readiness task force to ensure our preparedness work is refreshed. I also instructed Biosecurity New Zealand to conduct an on-the-ground audit of the palm kernel supply chain in Indonesia in order to ensure practice in this supply chain was meeting our strict health standards. It was found to be meeting our standards, but we’ll continue to monitor that. We also provided Indonesian authorities with personal protective equipment, disinfectant, backpacks for sprayers, and other tools to assist with Indonesia’s on-the-ground response as well as providing technical expertise. Other additional measures we’ve put in place include a new wide-reaching awareness campaign targeting travellers before they travel to Indonesia through in-flight announcements and on arrival at international airports. Every passenger arrival card is examined and those assessed as a risk are directed to a different process of questioning, baggage search, and disinfection. This means that should passengers transit other airports, risks are still addressed. We’re also providing regular updates to primary sector partners and the country’s veterinary network, and working with primary sector partners to ensure their farmers remain vigilant. We’re committed to doing what we can to keep foot-and-mouth out of New Zealand.

💬 Angela Roberts: What engagement has the Government taken to date with international partners to protect the country from foot-and-mouth disease?

💬 Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR: Biosecurity New Zealand’s experts are providing me with regular advice on the foot-and-mouth situation as it is overseas, and based on this advice, we will continue to adapt our approach. This includes working closely with our counterparts in Australia, who have also stepped up their biosecurity measures following the foot-and-mouth outbreak in Indonesia. We’re in constant contact, sharing information and advice on our respective biosecurity responses. And, as I noted in the primary response, I instructed Biosecurity New Zealand to conduct the on-the-ground audit of palm kernel supply, and we’ve provided equipment and advice and expertise to the Indonesian Government to help them battle this.

💬 Angela Roberts: What Budget support has been provided to protect the country from foot-and-mouth disease?

💬 Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR: The Government has made significant biosecurity investments in recent years, including the $110.9 million in Budget 2022. This included $21.2 million to boost critical diagnostic surveillance and investigative capability and heightened readiness for foot-and-mouth and other high impact animal diseases. This Government is committed to protecting New Zealand’s economic security.

Question No. 10—Health

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

Yes.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: Does he stand by his statement that the health system as a whole is coping, when he told this House recently that more than 20 percent of emergency department patients are waiting longer than six hours, and reports that some people are being forced to wait in leaky tents in hospital carparks?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I stand by my statements, behind a system that is facing the worst winter flu season it has faced in living memory, an ongoing impact of COVID-19 pandemic, and some of the worst levels of staff absenteeism our system has also seen. In the face of all of that, front-line nurses, doctors, front-line health managers are doing an absolutely outstanding job to make the decisions they have to make every day to make sure that the patients who turn up on their doorstep are getting the care that they need.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: Why, then, did he say on national television that the New Zealand Nurses Organisation was “speaking in forked tongues”, and does he think nurses working hard in a struggling health system appreciate the Minister of Health, who disparages them in the media?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I have not disparaged nurses in this country, who do an absolutely outstanding job, and I had the great privilege of meeting a group of them last week to talk about the experiences that they’re having at the moment with the incredible pressure that they’re under. But I simply make the point that at a time when the Government is working very hard to lift pay and conditions for all health workers—including significant pay increases for nurses, compared to, you know, the previous nine years when nurse pay went backwards in real terms—and having reached an agreement with the union representing most nurses, that that union then walks out of the agreement and then later complains that not enough is being done to lift nurse pay. I stand by the actions of this Government to work very hard to make sure that nurses get paid fairly for the work that they do.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: Can he confirm that he recently received a letter from 12 emergency department doctors in Palmerston North Hospital reporting that some patients with major trauma were being forced to wait in wheelchairs for up to nine hours; and, if so, what part of this is a health system that is coping?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I have received notifications of a variety of things in the last few weeks, all of which I’ve then sent to the appropriate authorities for investigation. At this point, the advice I’ve received from Te Whatu Ora Health New Zealand and from the Ministry of Health is that all appropriate steps are being taken to ensure that all patients in hospitals are getting the treatment that they need, under very difficult circumstances.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: Can he name one health waiting list that is better today than it was five years ago when Labour took office; and, if so, which one?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: What I can help that member with is to point out that we are in the third year of a global pandemic that has put extraordinary pressure on our health system and every health system. And so in 2020, we saw waiting lists grow, and then as a consequence of the $282.5 million that this Government allocated, we saw waiting lists come back. Then we had the Delta outbreak at the end of last year, the Omicron outbreak at the beginning of this year, and further pressure this winter, and that has put further pressure on waiting lists. What I’m very pleased about is that Te Whatu Ora Health New Zealand, when they were in their interim phase, established a clinical leadership team led by Andrew Connolly to get to work on the waiting lists, and last week the chief executive of Te Whatu Ora Health New Zealand issued a directive to all hospital leaders on a series of measures that they must take to reduce waiting lists. I’m satisfied that everything that can be done is being done.

💬 SPEAKER: Before I call the member, I’m just going to talk to Mr Doocey. Interjections are to be rare and reasonable, and the member knows that he should not be making interjections in the second person, which he has been repeatedly doing today. Feigning ignorance, if that’s what the member’s doing, of what he is doing when he is reprimanded doesn’t cut it with me.

Question No. 11—Education (School Operations)

11. to the Associate Minister of Education (School Operations): How is the Government supporting schools to prepare for term 3 winter illnesses and protect against COVID-19?

We know that winter illnesses historically peak at the start of term 3, and we have also been experiencing high numbers of cases of COVID-19 around the country. With schools returning this week, we have provided supports to them to help keep their students and staff safe. Last week, I wrote to boards of trustees of schools reminding them that the Government strongly encourages mask wearing. The public health advice continues to clearly show that mask wearing is a strong tool in the defence against the transmission of COVID-19 and other airborne respiratory viruses. That is why the Government is providing 10 million free child masks for terms 3 and 4 and continues to make adult-size masks available to schools for staff and older students. These masks are in addition to the 24 million adult-sized masks and nearly 4 million child masks already provided to schools this year.

💬 Shanan Halbert: Why was a mask mandate considered as not necessary at this time for the school environment?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: Schools implement their own mask-wearing policy, reflective of the current case rates in the school and community, and I am confident in their ability to do so. The ministries of health and education provided advice that mandating mask use is not necessary at this time, but it has strongly encouraged as much use as possible. We understand that mask wearing poses implementation challenges for schools—for example, younger children and students with learning support needs are unlikely to be able to comply with the mask mandate. There are also situations in schools where mask wearing might not be practicable, where it will have a significant impact on teaching and learning. We recognise that schools are best placed for managing mask requirements flexibility, to retain an appropriate balance of safety and minimise disruption to students’ learning. Schools have this, and I back them.

💬 Shanan Halbert: In addition to free masks, what other supports are in place?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: Funding is being made available for urgent ventilation property improvements, and a supplementary heating payment will help schools with their energy bills when balancing heating and ventilation this winter. A further distribution of CO2 monitoring devices and portable air cleaners, at no costs for State and State-integrated schools, has been confirmed and will occur early in term 3. We are confident that schools are able to implement appropriate health assessments based on public health advice, and that is reflective of the needs of their school community. I want to take this opportunity to thank our teachers, principals, and parents, who are doing a fantastic job. I’m pleased we’re able to provide this extra support to help them get through winter.

Question No. 12—Education (School Operations)

12. to the Associate Minister of Education (School Operations): What percentage of students attended school regularly in term 1 of 2022, and what actions, if any, has she taken, since seeing this data, to urgently reduce truancy?

Term 1 data for 2022 shows that, nationally, 46.1 percent of students met the criteria for regular attendance, which is attending school 90 percent of the time, or nine days out of a fortnight. This is a decrease from term 1 data from 2021, which showed 66.8 percent of students attending regularly, and it is reflective of the current COVID-19 outbreak that is affecting the country nationwide and of parents keeping their kids home from school. The Government has a razor-sharp focus on supporting schools and communities to work with their students to encourage regular attendance at school. The actions we have taken and continue to implement every day include rolling out the 13 actions in the Attendance and Engagement Strategy for tackling the decade-long decline in regular attendance and engagement in schools, supported by the $88 million of targeted funding on the ground. We are redesigning the Attendance Service to bring it closer to the schools and communities that it serves. These contracts are being developed as we speak and will be complete by December.

💬 Erica Stanford: How can she say that this is COVID-driven when the data shows that only half of the increase in non-attendance between term 4 last year and term 1 is driven by sickness, and children isolating at home are marked as attending?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: I have warned the member before not to cherry-pick at the data to make a political point. She is comparing oranges and apples. I would like to turn out—[Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Order!

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: I would like to point out that term 2 is our flagship data for attendance reporting. We have a longitudinal series of data that digitally dates back to 2011 and prior to that for term 2. Terms 1, 3, and 4 data is still short, only beginning in 2019 and heavily impacted by COVID, which is why I say that comparing term 4 to term 1 makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, and those of us with that knowledge understand that.

💬 Erica Stanford: Is the Minister saying that we should be disregarding the term 1 data showing that 102,000 children are now chronically truant from school, up from 68,000 in term 4?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: What I am saying is to be careful about making those comparisons. What I will say to that member is that if she wants—[Multiple members interject]

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! The member will resume her seat. If the members want this question to continue, they will be quiet.

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: What I will say to that member is that if she wants to disregard the concerns that many parents have around the seriousness of COVID-19 or the compounding factors that families are experiencing which are contributing to the lack of regular school attendance, then she is going to see that situation worsen. That is something that I am not prepared to do.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Can the Minister confirm that the level of chronic absence in New Zealand schools began to increase significantly around the time that the Attendance Service was fixed by the last National Government?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: Yes, I can confirm that. In 2015, the then National Government took that service and took it further away from schools, which meant that the chronic absences in this country skyrocketed. That is something that this Government will not tolerate any longer.

💬 Erica Stanford: Can the Minister tell this House how many truancy officers are employed now compared to under the old system?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: That is data that I do not have right in front of me at this time. If that member wanted that specific—[Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order! I indicated to members that if they wanted this question to continue, they would be quiet, but they clearly don’t.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Supplementary question, Mr Speaker.

💬 SPEAKER: No, no—the question’s finished.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: No, it isn’t.

💬 SPEAKER: The question has finished. That concludes oral questions.

💬 Chris Bishop: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I think we still have one supplementary question remaining.

💬 SPEAKER: The member might have.

💬 Erica Stanford: Supplementary question.

💬 SPEAKER: No, the member will resume her seat. I made it very clear to members that if they weren’t quiet, the question would be finished. They weren’t; it was.

💬 Chris Bishop: Point of order, Mr Speaker.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, I hope the member’s not going to argue with me, because he’s running a real risk of leaving the House.