Oral Questions

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

Yes, particularly the Government’s efforts to increase the supply of new homes. In the year ending July 2022, there were 50,614 new homes consented, up 12 percent from the year ended July 2021. Auckland has seen a 13 percent increase over the previous year, Canterbury 26 percent, and Wellington and Otago 20 percent. There’s been a particular rise in apartments and townhouses, highlighting the benefits of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development and medium-density housing reforms. The effect we’re having is clear. Just last week, Kiwibank Chief Economist Jarrod Kerr stated, “The housing shortage has shrunk from 57,000 homes to 23,000 homes”, and that we will, “start … [to accumulate] a surplus of housing over the coming years”.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Why did the Government introduce a bill yesterday to increase the tax on KiwiSaver when the Government’s own advice clearly stated that it would have wiped $103 billion off KiwiSaver balances?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Acknowledging that the member’s assertion in the first half of the question was incorrect, the proposal was around standardising the applications of GST fees and services for managed funds providers. The goal of those changes, which were instigated through a review that began in 2017 under the last Government, was to even out the playing field. When we hear clearly from the sector that their view is that the status quo is preferred—we’ve heard that, because what is most important to us is confidence in KiwiSaver.

💬 Chris Bishop: Point of order. I seek leave to table the taxation (annual rates for 2022/23 platform economy and remedial matters) departmental disclosure statement, given the Prime Minister clearly hasn’t read it.

💬 SPEAKER: Can I ask the member: is that publicly available?

💬 Chris Bishop: Well, that’s actually an interesting question, because the bill has been introduced to the House, but I understand the—

💬 SPEAKER: Yeah, that’s not—it’s either publicly available or it’s not.

💬 Chris Bishop: It’s actually removed from the public domain, because the Government policy seems to be in disarray on this issue.

💬 SPEAKER: That’s not the question I asked.

💬 Chris Bishop: Well, I don’t know if it’s publicly available any more, sir.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker.

💬 SPEAKER: Are you speaking to this? I haven’t ruled on this.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Yes.

💬 SPEAKER: You can speak to this one.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Members well know that when a bill is tabled, the disclosure statements are tabled at the same time. Raising this issue in the way the member has is clearly designed to be deliberately disorderly.

💬 SPEAKER: Yeah, I have to agree, but responding that way is equally disorderly as well. Can we call that one-all and move on?

💬 Christopher Luxon: Did the legislation to increase tax on KiwiSaver fees go through the proper Cabinet process, and why was it introduced given a day later, the Government has signalled it will not be proceeding?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The member will be aware that it did go through a process. The member will also be aware, by the release of that documentation alongside it, that it went through a consultation process. In the regulatory impact statement, you can see that there were some, of course, who viewed that this would be an advantageous change. There are others who viewed it would not be. We have seen a fairly clear response to an attempt by us to even up the playing field on KiwiSaver. Our view is that if this does anything to undermine KiwiSaver, it is something that we will not support.

💬 David Seymour: Does the Prime Minister accept that dropping the KiwiSaver GST changes will reduce Government revenue by an estimated $225 million per year, and, if so, will her Government spend less or borrow more to make up the shortfall?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Ultimately the second half of that question is irrelevant because it was from 2026 onward. The other point that I would make is that there are a number of caveats around whether or not this would indeed increase to that level. That was not the driver of the change. Evening out the playing field for boutique providers versus large fund managers was the goal. But if we hear clearly back from fund providers that they do not believe it will improve the system, then we’ve heard that.

💬 David Seymour: Why does the Prime Minister think that balancing the Budget will be irrelevant from 2026 onwards?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Because it is not the basis on which Budget decisions have been made.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Does she take it as a vote of confidence in her Government that the leader of the ACT Party is confidently predicting that her Government will still be in office in 2026?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Ah, Mr Speaker—

💬 SPEAKER: That’s out of order.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Is she embarrassed that just a day after introducing a bill to increase taxes on KiwiSaver, the Government has performed a humiliating U-turn and dropped it?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: What I would be embarrassed about is leading a party who once called KiwiSaver a glorified Christmas club; who opposed its introduction; who, for instance, reduced the Government contribution; who have, over a period of time, stopped contributions to the Superannuation Fund, and did everything in their power to undermine KiwiSaver. That is hardly a credible position from a member whose party’s history has been opposed to KiwiSaver in its totality.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Why did her Government introduce a bill to Parliament that would have wiped $103 billion off the value of hard-working Kiwis’ KiwiSaver balances?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I also would have accepted that the member may have read a little further down in the regulatory impact statement that also says that stakeholders have also advised that for some managers, that would incur no material transition costs; others may incur significant transitional costs. Of course, if this was about ensuring an evening up of the playing field, in some cases GST was already being applied; in others it was not. Of course, making assumptions, therefore, of how much revenue it will generate would be heavily caveated, but nor was it the goal of this provision in the first place.

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: Does the Prime Minister believe that the following actions would undermine confidence in KiwiSaver: cutting hundreds of millions of dollars a year from what was going in to KiwiSaver accounts, introducing a tax on employer contributions, halving the member tax credit—

💬 Nicola Willis: Caught red-handed.

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: —and ditching—

💬 Hon Member: You win.

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: —it’s in a question; I’ll start again, Mr Speaker—cutting hundreds of millions of dollars a year from what was going in to KiwiSaver accounts, introducing a tax on employer contributions, halving the member tax credit, and ditching the thousand-dollar kick-start payment, all of which were done by the National Party?

💬 SPEAKER: Now, I’m going to rule on the at least three interjections during that question which were out of order. Yesterday, I warned Nicola Willis about the timing of interjections; there was nothing about the timing on that one. I think that was deliberate. Nicola Willis will stand, withdraw, and apologise.

💬 Nicola Willis: I withdraw and apologise.

💬 David Seymour: Point of order.

💬 SPEAKER: Now, further to that point of order, the end of the Hon Grant Robertson’s question was out of order, so I’m ruling it out.

💬 David Seymour: Mr Speaker, I seek your guidance on the content of the question. I mean, it appeared to be about five questions listing a series of different policies, and I just wonder if you view that as an acceptable question, because, if so, we’ll certainly take advantage of that.

💬 SPEAKER: You are absolutely correct. There are two ways I can handle that issue: to interrupt the member while he’s doing it, remembering that we had three interjections during that question, probably provoked by the question itself; or, wait until the member has completed the question, as I did in this instance, to deal with both issues and try to get some fairness in dealing with it. But yeah, I do acknowledge I could have done it that way; I chose not to. In the end, we have the same result.

💬 Christopher Luxon: How does she reconcile her decision to introduce a $225 million a year tax on KiwiSaver yesterday with her statement in May that “We are not doing any work on any additional tax policy”?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Firstly, I’ll point out that this work started under the National Government in 2017, and if they were so oppositional to it, I don’t quite understand why they didn’t stop it being instigated in the first place. The second point is even in the asking of the question you can see one of the issues here. This is on the application of GST service fees. The way the member has talked about this will lead people to believe that it is on individual contributions. That is not what it sought to do. Regardless of that, we were seeking to even up the playing field, because currently GST on services was already being applied to some funds and it was not for others. The sector has spoken and said that they do not believe it will enhance KiwiSaver arrangements, and so we will not proceed.

💬 Christopher Luxon: What other secret taxes, if any, is the Government working on; and will she commit, again, to not introducing any more new taxes on hard-working Kiwis?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The member well knows the existence of GST is not new. The evening out in the way that it is applied is not a new tax. As I also said, this piece of work had been ongoing with IRD for several years. A final point here is the difference between this side of the House and that side of the House is that we consider KiwiSaver so important that we, unlike the other party—who not only have tinkered with it and destroyed it every time they have been in Government—we are here to protect it, preserve it, and grow it.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Does she still have confidence in her revenue Minister?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Absolutely.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Will she now do a U-turn on the tenant tax that officials told her would increase rents and put pressure on the State house waiting list?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I actually believe in ensuring that first-home buyers can buy houses, and I refer back to the first answer that I gave in this House, and that is, under this Government, you’re starting to see a decrease in the gap for housing supply in this country. That is what New Zealanders wanted their Government to do, and that is what we’ve done.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Does the Government have nothing better to do in the middle of a cost of living crisis than to cook up new ways to tax hard-working Kiwis, and to fleece them out of their retirement savings?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Thank you for the opportunity to talk about what we’re doing on the cost of living crisis. On Thursday, the cost of living payment will go into Kiwis’ bank accounts, for everyone earning $70,000 or less, to the tune of $116 a week. We’ve already halved the cost of public transport. We’ve decreased fuel at the pump by 25c a litre. We have the winter energy payment continuing to support those on low incomes. And I tell you what we won’t do: we won’t, for instance, halve annual KiwiSaver Government contributions like that Government did. We don’t stop Super Fund contributions, which has reduced our savings for retirement by $32 billion. We will support Kiwis to save, and that’s what we’re demonstrating.

💬 Shanan Halbert: E te Māngai o te Whare, tēnā koe. Question to the Minister of Finance—

💬 Rt Hon Trevor Mallard: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I said I wouldn’t do this, but there’s a quiet member behind me who’s trying to have a supplementary—

💬 SPEAKER: Sorry, were you wanting a supplementary on the previous question, was it?

💬 Dr Gaurav Sharma: Does the Prime Minister stand by her statement regarding the Henry Rongomau Bennett acute mental health centre in Waikato that it’s no longer fit for purpose and, if so, can she give an assurance to the people of Hamilton and greater Waikato that the new $100 million acute mental health unit, promised to have groundwork started in 2022 and due to open in 2023, is on track?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: In answer to the first half of the question: yes.

Question No. 2—Finance

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

The export sector is continuing to support the economy. Statistics New Zealand reported that exports rose 16 percent, to $6.7 billion, in July compared to the same month a year earlier. On an annual basis, exports rose 12 percent, to $68.3 billion. The sector is continuing to show its resilience in what is a difficult and uncertain global environment. Global shipping costs are now starting to ease, although they do remain subject to disruptions. Nevertheless, New Zealand finds itself in a good position to face the challenges ahead and support New Zealanders to blunt the sharp edges of the global economic slowdown.

💬 Shanan Halbert: Which sectors are contributing to the rise in exports and the growth of the economy?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The main contribution to the rise in exports did indeed come from the dairy sector, rising 39 percent, to $2 billion, in July on the back of higher prices for milk powder, butter, and cheese, while volumes also rose for milk powder and butter. Red meat sales also rose 24 percent, to $935 million, due to higher beef and sheep prices and higher sheep volumes.

💬 Shanan Halbert: Which regions are buying our exports and supporting economic growth?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Demand among our major export partners has remained resilient despite the challenging global environment. Sales to Asia rose nearly 13 percent for the July year, led by China and Japan, while exports to the US rose 13 percent; Europe up 6.5 percent; and Australia, 2.6 percent.

💬 Shanan Halbert: What reports has he seen on the prospects for the export sector and its impact on the economy?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: In the latest quarterly predictions, the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research is forecasting global demand for the country’s products and services to remain resilient despite the global challenges. The opening of borders will also support a faster recovery in the tourism and education sectors. In its forecast released this morning, ASB economists expect global food challenges and open borders to support our export earnings.

💬 Shanan Halbert: What other reports has he seen on the economy?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I know that the member for Taranaki - King Country will be interested to know that last week, Fonterra forecast a milk payout for the current season of between $8.50 and $10 per kilo of milksolids. The midpoint of $9.25 would represent one of the highest prices ever paid out in Fonterra’s history. The dairy cooperative said that the long-term outlook remains positive.

Question No. 3—Finance

3. to the Minister of Finance: Does the Minister stand by the Government’s economic and fiscal policy and all Cabinet decisions giving effect to that policy?

As I said to the member yesterday, our economic policy has led to strong outcomes such as a 3.3 percent unemployment rate, a larger economy than before COVID, inflation below that of many of the countries we compare ourselves against, and some of the lowest public debt in the world. In answer to the second part of the question, I always respect and uphold collective Cabinet responsibility. And as I’m sure the member will be aware, if she has specific questions about the details of specific policies, she should address those questions to the members responsible.

💬 Nicola Willis: Did Cabinet agree to a Government policy to make all KiwiSaver management and investment fees subject to 15 percent GST, meaning KiwiSaver members would have less available when they withdrew funds to purchase a first home or for retirement; and does that remain Government policy?

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. The Minister being asked the question is not responsible for that. Those are rightly the responsibility of the Minister of Revenue. If that’s what the member wanted to know, she should have asked a question to the Minister of Revenue.

💬 Nicola Willis: Responding to the point of order.

💬 SPEAKER: Can you read the question again?

💬 Nicola Willis: Certainly. I asked: did Cabinet agree to a Government policy to make all KiwiSaver management and investment fees subject to 15 percent GST, meaning KiwiSaver members would have less available when they withdrew funds to purchase a first home or at retirement; and does that remain Government policy?

💬 SPEAKER: Is the Minister responsible for GST?

💬 Nicola Willis: Absolutely.

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Point of order, Mr Speaker.

💬 SPEAKER: No, you can speak to this one.

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Speaking to the point of order, the question asks whether or not Cabinet decided something. That is—

💬 Nicola Willis: Ducking and diving.

💬 SPEAKER: Oh, gosh. I’m ruling that question out of order. Part of it could go to the Minister of Revenue, part of it to the—probably—Prime Minister, who’s responsible for the Cabinet.

💬 Chris Bishop: Point of order, Mr Speaker.

💬 SPEAKER: A new point of order.

💬 Chris Bishop: The primary question is a very broad one in relation to economic and fiscal policy. That is well within the remit of the Minister of Finance. If the Minister of Finance is not responsible for economic and fiscal policy, it’s a little bit unclear exactly who is. And the question is well within those realms. A taxation policy is fiscal policy.

💬 SPEAKER: No, I disagree. You’ve got a further supplementary?

💬 Nicola Willis: Was the Minister of Finance present at the Cabinet meeting that agreed to introduce a new KiwiSaver tax; and if so, why did that Minister support a tax policy that would reduce New Zealanders’ retirement savings?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I was—and this will be a massive revelation—present at a Cabinet meeting where decision was made on the taxation arrangements around managed funds, yes.

💬 Nicola Willis: Isn’t it correct that the reason the Minister agreed to the KiwiSaver tax is that he was excited by the prospect of $225 million in extra revenue, fleecing the pockets of New Zealanders to feed his Government’s addiction to spending?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Much of that question is both hyperbolic and inaccurate.

💬 Nicola Willis: Was the Minister aware that the Financial Markets Authority advised the Government that the KiwiSaver tax would reduce KiwiSaver fund balances by $103 billion; and if so, why did the Minister of Finance agree to that?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As already articulated, the questions the member is asking on the detail of the policy are best directed to the Minister of Revenue. What I can say is that on this side of the House, we take very seriously the responsibilities we have to support New Zealanders through their retirement. It’s the reason, for example, why we have made contributions to the super fund in contrast to the previous Government, who denied New Zealanders $32 billion by not contributing to the super fund.

💬 Nicola Willis: If it is, in fact, the case that the Minister does wish to look after KiwiSaver, doesn’t he think it would be appropriate, as the Minister of Finance, that he stay across the detail of the new taxes that his revenue Minister keeps dreaming up?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: On this side of the House, I am very proud of a Government that has managed, over the course of the last few years, to ensure that we have an economy that is bigger than before COVID, that we have a level of debt that is lower than most other countries in the world, that has unemployment at 3.3 percent. The Minister of Revenue and other Ministers have all contributed to that positive record for New Zealand.

Question No. 4—Housing

4. to the Minister of Housing: What action is the Government taking to rebuild public housing in New Zealand?

The Government is rebuilding New Zealand’s housing safety net with the biggest State housing building programme since the 1970s. We’re seeing the green shoots of progress, with the Government adding more than 10,000 net new public homes since 2017, including 8,240 of these being brand-new builds. To put this in perspective, of the 76,450 public homes in New Zealand today, over 13 percent, or 10,216, have been added in the last five years. This is a significant achievement when you consider the remaining homes have been amassed since the first State house was built in 1937.

💬 Terisa Ngobi: What changes has the Government made that have enabled the rebuild of public housing in New Zealand?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: There have been many changes made, from rebuilding capacity at Kāinga Ora through to increasing income-related rent subsidy funding by over 60 percent. But a significant change we have made is enabling the practice of reinvesting the income from Kāinga Ora into maintenance and building new homes. This stands in stark contrast to the $576 million in dividends that were extracted from, then, Housing New Zealand between 2008 and 2017.

💬 Tangi Utikere: How many of the Government’s 10,000 new public homes are in Palmerston North?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: The Government has already added 108 net public houses in Palmerston North since 2017. Unfortunately, we’re yet to make up for the houses lost between 2008 and 2017, when there was a net loss of 115 public houses in Palmerston North. I’m happy to report there are currently over 300 new homes in the pipeline, due to be completed by June 2025; approximately half of these homes are already in construction or contracted and all of which have received resource consent.

💬 Jo Luxton: How is Ashburton benefiting from the Government’s 10,000 new public houses?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I’m pleased to report that our Government has added 14 new public homes in Ashburton over the last five years, with 109 more houses to come by 2025, of which 15 are already under construction, contracted, and already have consents. This was an area where the previous Government did make some progress on: over nine years, they added two houses.

💬 Hon Meka Whaitiri: How many of the Government’s 10,000 new public homes are in Gisborne?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: We have delivered 52 new public homes in Gisborne since 2017. Unfortunately, there was a net loss of 33 public homes in Gisborne between 2008 and 2017; we’re working hard to undo this damage, with over 300 home builds currently in the pipeline, due to be completed by June 2025. This is the largest housing investment in Gisborne in decades; over 100 of these home builds already have resource consents, including 14 homes in Manuka Street and a further 21 homes on Gladstone Road.

Question No. 5—Prime Minister

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

Yes.

💬 David Seymour: Does she stand by the Government’s policy of introducing an equity index for school funding which “Considers 37 variables that we know relate to achievement, and is based on the circumstances of individual tamariki and rangatahi”, with those variables being based on actual students’ performance over the previous 20 years?

Yes, I stand by the decision made by the Government on the equity index relative to the old decile system. The member will appreciate, when you are taking into account a number of variables, as the Minister has just described, for a detailed analysis, either questions on notice or to the direct Minister responsible will always be much more edifying for the member.

💬 David Seymour: Why is the Government using just one variable, being ethnicity, to determine access to certain types of healthcare instead of targeting healthcare funding to those most in need, based on up to 37 variables, like it’s doing with education?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: If what the member is trying to claim is that the Māori Health Authority, for instance, isn’t taking into account the history of our health system, where we have consistently underperformed and underserved Māori, to therefore describe why we shouldn’t have that authority, I have to say, I firmly disagree. The evidence already demonstrates that on the old system, where we had, of course, service provision that was provided under 20 district health boards, we had outcomes that demonstrated we were poorly serving Māori. No one can disagree with that. Our view has been that if we want to improve, we need to change the way the system is delivering services for Māori. I would hope the member would come on board with that system.

💬 David Seymour: Does the Prime Minister accept that education in New Zealand has also historically and chronically underserved Māori students, and, if so, why is education but not health using an evidence-based, data-driven formula to target human need rather than ethnicity?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I would argue we are targeting human need. That demonstration of that is our data demonstrates that if you are Māori, your outcomes for cancer are worse for every single cancer except melanoma. That is data and evidence that our existing services are poorly serving Māori. If we needed any demonstration that doing things differently services our populations well, the COVID-19 response and the exceptional work done by Māori health providers was a proof point. I don’t understand, frankly, why the member would be afraid to use Māori service delivery, where it is available, to try and lift health outcomes for Māori.

💬 David Seymour: Why is Pharmac using ethnicity to determine access to diabetes medicine, the Ministry of Health using ethnicity to determine access to the flu jab, meaning that a well-off person, high in every other variable, might be put ahead of a poorly-off person, purely on the basis of just one variable, when education shows there’s a better way to do things?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I wish it weren’t true that in New Zealand, health outcomes were worse for Māori and Pasifika populations, but, sadly, they are. If we are going to be data and evidence driven, we need to factor that in.

Question No. 6—Education

6. to the Minister of Education: What support has the Government contributed to help schools to provide learning environments for their students that are warm, dry, and fit for purpose?

The Government’s got a comprehensive programme of upgrading and expanding and modernising our schools. As of August this year, there are 313 Ministry of Education - led property projects in construction across New Zealand. These include nine new schools, eight new school expansions, 124 redevelopments, 38 redevelopment and roll-growth projects, 77 learning-support property modifications, and 57 roll-growth projects.

💬 Jo Luxton: What, if anything, has been delivered, in terms of redevelopments and additional student places, from the spending?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Twenty seven thousand, two hundred and ninety eight additional student places have been delivered through the building of schools and classrooms so far. This month, the Prime Minister celebrated the opening of a new 12 teaching space block at Waterview Primary School to support the school’s growing roll. We’ve also fully completed 62 major redevelopments worth over $460 million since 2019, and around half of these have been completed in the last year.

💬 Jo Luxton: How is the Government ensuring that schools affected by the Christchurch earthquakes have access to safe, quality learning environments?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The Christchurch Schools Rebuild programme is building new, rebuilding, or repairing 115 schools in the wider Christchurch area—

💬 Hon Louise Upston: Thanks to National.

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: —affecting around 45,000 students. The programme was, of course, started under National; it’s a shame they didn’t fund it. Seventy-eight schools are now complete, with 23 currently in construction.

💬 Jo Luxton: How are small and remote schools being supported to improve classrooms for their students?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Back in September, we announced a programme to improve the internal environments of over 600 State schools that are in small or remote communities. This programme includes the installation of LED lighting, thermal blankets, acoustic panels, and residual current devices to improve the quality of those classrooms. Already, while it was only launched in September, 95 of those constructions projects have been completed.

Question No. 7—Revenue

7. to the Minister of Revenue: Is he committed to implementing the KiwiSaver provisions of the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2022-23, Platform Economy, and Remedial Matters) Bill; if so, why?

No.

💬 Andrew Bayly: In what month and what year did IRD commence work on the proposal to introduce GST on KiwiSaver funds?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: I’m not aware of the month, but I am aware that it was in 2017, under the last National Government.

💬 Andrew Bayly: When on 2 May the Prime Minister said, “We are not doing any work on any additional tax policy.”, had he made it clear to the Prime Minister he would shortly thereafter propose to increase GST on KiwiSaver fees; and, if not, did he alert the Prime Minister after her statement on 2 May?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: This was not a new tax; this was closing a—

💬 Hon Members: Ha, ha!

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: GST is not a new tax; this is about closing a loophole. Currently, some providers of these services pay GST and their competitors don’t.

💬 Andrew Bayly: On what date did he specifically discuss the proposal to put GST on KiwiSaver fees with the Cabinet committee, and was this recorded in the Cabinet committee minutes?

💬 Hon DAVID PARKER: Of course it was recorded. I can’t recall the exact date, but it would have been the date when the policy decisions were taken on what matters would be included in the tax bill.

Question No. 8—Pike River Re-entry

8. to the Minister responsible for Pike River Re-entry: What recent announcement has he made about support for families and communities affected by future significant national disasters?

Yesterday, I joined the Prime Minister; the Minister for Public Service, the Hon Chris Hipkins; and survivors of some of New Zealand’s darkest days—Aramoana, Cave Creek, Pike River, and others—to launch new Working with Survivors model standards for the Public Service. Our public servants are motivated by a spirit of service, and the model standards will support officials with care expectations that apply the lessons of the past and provide for better support for survivors of future national disasters. The model standards were co-authored in true partnership with the survivors, led by the Stand With Pike Families Reference Group, alongside Te Kawa Mataaho, the Public Service Commission.

💬 Rachel Boyack: What are the expectations in the new model standards?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: The expectations require Public Service agencies to commit to following and supporting the journey survivors go through following a significant national disaster. In the immediate aftermath, it’s about the necessities of life and reuniting loved ones; next, it’s helping with the adjustment to the new normal; and finally, it’s about getting to the bottom of what happened, learning from it, and promoting healing.

💬 Rachel Boyack: What principles did the co-authors apply for the new expectations?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: Three simple principles underpin the model standards. They are to: firstly, empower survivors; secondly, be up front; and thirdly, work together. Additionally, the model standards recognise survivors as including physically injured or psychologically affected people, bereaved and affected whānau, and members of the wider community, including those based offshore.

💬 Rachel Boyack: Which Public Service agency is responsible for implementing the expectations?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: The model standards are published by Te Kawa Mataaho Public Service Commission and apply to the whole of the Public Service. In the immediate aftermath of a disaster, the responsibility for upholding the standards sits with the lead response agency.

💬 Rachel Boyack: What response has he seen to the announcement of the standards?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I’ve seen a number of responses, including from survivors of Aramoana and Pike River. One was from the formidable Sonya Rockhouse MNZM, member of the Stand With Pike Families Reference Group, reflecting on her long journey from 2010 until seeing the model standards announced yesterday. Sonya said, and I quote, “I couldn’t see how we would ever get justice, but we did. Throughout all we achieved together and with the other Pike River families and our supporters, we got our voices back.”

Question No. 9—Police

9. to the Minister of Police: Is he concerned by the 518 percent increase in ram raids since the beginning of 2018; if so, why has he not met with a single business owner who has been a victim of a ram raid since he became Minister of Police?

In answer to the first part of the question, yes. In answer to the second part of the question, my focus in my first few months on the job has been getting out and about and meeting as many police and visiting as many police districts as possible, meeting key stakeholders, ensuring that I understand all of the various policy issues that police are grappling with, and ensuring that the police have the relevant tools that they need in order to combat the crime they are facing. I certainly intend to continue getting out and about and meeting with people, and that will include a greater range of stakeholders, including the victims of ram raids.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Wouldn’t the Minister surely consider the victims of ram raids as being the most important key stakeholder?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: They are certainly an important stakeholder, as are people who are the victims of firearms-related offending, as are people who are the victims of domestic and family violence, as are a range of other stakeholders that I will also be intending to meet with when the appropriate opportunity arises.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Does he accept that this offending is being done predominantly by youth gangs?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: No. The police would suggest that the majority of the people undertaking this type of offending are not people who are affiliated with gangs.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: How can the Minister make that statement in the House when it flies in direct contradiction to the police intelligence reports that say that this offending is predominantly being committed by youth gangs?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I’m not sure that that is what the reports have actually been saying. In fact, the conversations I’ve been having with police suggest that that is not the case. I can also tell the member that the number of repeat offenders undertaking ram raids is actually declining, which in itself is a concerning statistic because it suggests that there are more young people getting involved in this type of activity.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: So is the Minister telling this House that his advice from the police is that these ram raids and youth offending is not being driven by organised youth crime and youth gangs?

💬 Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: That is the advice that I’ve received from police, yes.

💬 SPEAKER: The member has run out of supplementaries.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Point of order. I seek leave to table an Official Information Act request from a New Zealand Police scanning report on ram raids.

💬 SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? It may be tabled.

Document, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.

Question No. 10—Foreign Affairs

10. to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: What recent announcements has she made about delivery of the $1.3 billion Government climate finance investments?

While visiting Tonga and Niue this month, I launched Aotearoa New Zealand’s New Zealand International Climate Finance Strategy - Tuia te Waka a Kiwa. Fifty percent of this fund will support the Pacific, and 50 percent will go towards adaptation. The strategy sets out key principles and goals that will shape our climate finance investment over the next four years. This approach further strengthens New Zealand’s partnership with the Pacific and supports locally led solutions.

💬 Ibrahim Omer: Why does the strategy emphasise a partnership approach to climate finance?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: We know that many communities have been living with changes in their environment for decades and are best placed to develop their own solutions and adaptation plans. This is certainly true for the Pacific. For example, Tonga has put in place a climate change fund Act to manage and prioritise its projects. So our partnership approach might involve funding countries’ own adaptation plans or supporting locally led projects to promote community resilience to climate change and disasters.

💬 Ibrahim Omer: How will this partnership approach to climate finance work in practice?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: I can give an example: while in Tonga, I announced Aotearoa New Zealand’s new contribution of $8 million to Tonga’s climate change fund. In line with our partnership approach, this will be directed to Tonga’s own priorities, such as projects to strengthen the resilience of public infrastructure, enhance coastal protections, and develop sustainable agriculture. I’d like to also acknowledge the significant contribution of women and young people, who I met in Tonga, tackling their communities’ climate challenges.

💬 Ibrahim Omer: How will the climate finance strategy support the Pacific in responding to the impacts of climate change?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: We’ve seen time and time again the serious threat climate change poses to the Pacific Islands. We’ve sought feedback from Pacific partners in shaping the principles and goals of this strategy, such as enhanced resilience and adaptation to the impacts of climate change, promote accelerated climate change mitigation, improved institutional capability, and evidence-based decision-making, leveraging our investment by working with other donors to ensure greater climate impact. Our strategy will support their decision making by providing greater access to, and use of, education, science, indigenous knowledge, and local techniques to combat climate change.

💬 Ibrahim Omer: How will New Zealand’s climate finance build Pacific resilience?

💬 Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Building resilience is woven throughout the climate finance strategy, and will be a key focus of our investment in the Pacific. An example is the $10 million allocated in July to the Fiji-based Centre for Pacific Crops and Trees, which is conserving the region’s collections of 17 crops, including yam, coconut, and 70 percent of the world’s taro varieties. This investment will increase the Pacific’s resilience by ensuring our region’s seeds and plant materials are preserved and protected for future generations. This investment will help to restore heritage crops, as was the case after the Hunga Tonga-Hunga Haʻapai volcanic eruption that occurred earlier this year.

Question No. 11—Education (School Operations)

11. to the Associate Minister of Education (School Operations): Does the Ministry of Education meet the full cost of learning support needs for tamariki in Aotearoa?

We know that there are some unmet learning support needs for some tamariki and rangatahi in Aotearoa. As Associate Minister of Education, I have been very open about that. While we have a suite of evidence-based interventions and supports available, part of the challenge is understanding the individual needs of students and finding the right intervention at the right time. This is why I commissioned a comprehensive review into the support needed for students who are considered to have the highest needs for learning—and need support as an intervention.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: Does the Ministry of Education meet the full cost of teacher aide wages?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: As I’ve said, we know that there are unmet needs for some tamariki and rangatahi in this country. As such, that is why I have commissioned this Highest Needs Review, which will report back to me shortly. I will be taking recommendations through to Cabinet in October.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: Does she think it’s reasonable for parents and school communities to fundraise for a shortfall of teacher aide funding?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: This is exactly why we have commissioned the review into our highest-needs students in this country. Schools may draw from a variety of funding sources, including operational grant funding, in addition to that provided by the ministry; there’s also funding provided by other agencies and locally raised funds. I will point out that it is inadequate when we hear of those stories of parents supporting teacher aides at that time—it is something that is actually illegal; exactly why we have the High Needs Review in train.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: Is she committed to ensuring all students with additional learning needs receive fully funded support to enable them to thrive at school?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: We know our Government is committed to barrier-free access to education for all students. But we do know that there is more work to do to address the fact that some students aren’t getting the right support they need and when they need it. This is exactly, as I say, why we have commissioned the High Needs Review.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: Will the High Needs Review include changes to the funding model to ensure the needs of all children are met and to provide fair pay and good working conditions for learning support staff?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: The learning support systems we have in place were established over 20 years ago and haven’t been reviewed since then. While I don’t want to go on what those recommendations will be when they come back to me, I have asked officials to be bold. We need to look at the system as a whole; we need to look at a system that works around the young person with that person at the centre, not the young person working around the system. That includes the staffing who support that young person.

💬 Teanau Tuiono: Does she agree with Te Tai Tokerau Principals’ Association president that—and I quote—“We always need more support. Schools are used to putting rubber bands and stoppers around things, but we have so many kids with needs these days that it’s becoming a bottomless pit.”, and if so, what will she do to improve the support given to schools?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: I have had many robust conversations with that particular president of the Tai Tokerau Principals’ Association, and I will continue to do so into the future; I’m quite certain of that. I have commissioned the High Needs Review, I await those recommendations, and I look forward to taking those recommendations through to Cabinet.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Members will note that there are 11 oral questions today instead of the usual 12. I understand that, this morning, accidentally, the Office of the Clerk gave the Māori Party advice that they didn’t have a primary question today, and, therefore, they did not lodge one by the deadline. I, therefore, seek leave for the Māori Party to be allocated an additional primary question to make up for that, that it be on a day of their choice, and that it be inserted into the line-up for that day as question No. 4, which would have been the question that they would have had today.

💬 SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There appears to be none. It will be so.

Brooke van Velden: Mr Speaker, am I able to speak to the point that the Minister has raised? I noted that a few of us have had correspondence with the Māori Party today. They were specifically wishing to seek leave tomorrow to ask a question. So I wondered whether we could actually delay this discussion until the Māori Party are here to speak for themselves on this?

💬 SPEAKER: Well, I’ve already declared—sorry. I’ve already put the leave to the House, and there was no objection. The way the leave was put was that Te Paati Māori can, indeed, choose to have that question tomorrow, should they wish. So I think it’s entirely up to them.