Oral Questions

1. to the Minister of Finance: Fakaalofa lahi atu, Mr Speaker. What recent reports has he seen on the New Zealand economy?

Statistics New Zealand has recently reported that the number of filled jobs rose by 10,312 or 0.4 percent compared with the previous months to a record high of 2.32 million New Zealanders being in work. This sits alongside near-record low unemployment. The gains have been broad-based across our economy on an annual basis. The biggest increases have been in professional services, construction, manufacturing, retail, and public administration and safety. And by age group, 15- to 19-year-olds made the largest contribution to the increase in filled jobs, making up 17.2 percent of the increase.

💬 Glen Bennett: What other reports has he seen on job growth in the economy?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Earlier this month, the SEEK NZ Employment Report reported that job ads are up 22.4 percent on the same month a year ago, while the trend measure remains near record highs and is around 50 percent above the pre-COVID benchmark of December 2019.

💬 Glen Bennett: How does New Zealand’s employment rate compare with the rest of the world?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: New Zealand’s employment rate is among the highest in the OECD at 79.2 percent—the fourth highest among the 38 nations. This compares with Australia in seventh, the UK in 12th, Canada in 13th, and the US in 22nd place. In terms of unemployment, New Zealand ranks sixth equal out of the 38 nations in the OECD.

💬 Glen Bennett: How do the employment reports impact on households facing higher inflation in the economy?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: We know that New Zealanders are doing it tough when it comes to dealing with cost of living pressures but, critically, they do this while they are in work. With a record number of New Zealanders in paid work, this helps take pressure off their day-to-day living costs in what is a challenging environment. The Government is of course also doing its bit by supporting New Zealanders with cost of living pressures, such as through the fuel tax cuts and the half-price public transport fares as well as the increases that we’ve seen for seniors, those getting Working for Families, and those on benefits. Having New Zealanders in work in this time of an inflation crisis is critically important to their wellbeing.

Question No. 2—Prime Minister

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

Fakaalofa lahi atu, and a warm and happy Niuean Language Week to the House. Yes, particularly this Government’s decision early on in the COVID-19 pandemic to invest in skills, in training, and deliver pipeline infrastructure work. On Monday, the Minister for the Environment announced three more projects that have been referred for fast-track consent. All three were housing projects and, if consented, will provide almost 900 homes in Queenstown and Auckland—areas experiencing high housing demand. This builds on last week’s investment in transport and water infrastructure to kick-start new housing developments in Lower Hutt, Nelson, Rangiora, Ngāruawāhia, Hastings, Motueka, Whanganui, and Lake Hāwea, estimated to enable across the board nearly 11,000 homes. Between 2008 and 2011, residential construction activity halved and only returned to 2004 levels in 2018. In contrast, our strong economic management and fiscal positions means we are well placed to invest in critical new infrastructure.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Does she regret increasing Government spending by a billion dollars a week more, given one result is Kiwi homeowners having to pay hundreds of dollars a week more in mortgage payments?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I would note the member’s spending plan would include $3 billion of unfunded tax cuts, which would create an increase in debt, probably drive up unemployment, and would also likely definitely have an impact on first-home buyers, given one of the areas he wants to impact are those where investors are incentivised to buy up houses. On the question of Government spending, do I stand by extra investment in Pharmac? I do. Do I stand by 4,000 more nurses? I do. Do I stand by half a million free mental health services treatment for those suffering mental health issues? I do. What the member needs to be honest about is what he will cut.

💬 Christopher Luxon: So much! When will she admit that that spend—[Interruption]. When you spend a billion dollars a week more there’s a lot to cut, a lot of waste. When will she admit that spending an extra $38 billion at the last Budget was a mistake, given sky-high inflation and interest rates that are heading well over 6 percent by Christmas?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: And here I come back to the facts. As COVID-19 - related expenditure winds down, Government spending as a share of GDP will fall from 35 percent to below 30 percent of GDP, which is within the historic averages that we have experienced in New Zealand. So again, I ask the member the question: what is it he will cut? Will it be the 10,000 more public houses? Will it be the 2,900 more teachers? Will it be the 26 weeks of paid parental leave? Will it be the 61 percent increase in apprentices? What will it be?

💬 Christopher Luxon: What does she say to the family of four I met recently at a budgeting service who had to refinance their mortgage and, because of her Government’s economic mismanagement, their interest payments are now so high they’re struggling to avoid a mortgagee sale?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I would say to them that they can be assured that under this Government we will not, for instance, spend $3 billion on tax cuts that will give someone on $300,000, $150 a week and someone on $42,000, $2 a week. Instead, you will get in this Government responsible fiscal management that keeps unemployment down, debt low, and growth higher than many of other countries that we would compare to, and the ability to invest in the services that they need and expect.

💬 Christopher Luxon: You’re not doing it. You’re just not doing it. Does she really believe—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Yeah, no more of that, please. Ask a question. Don’t give a narrative for anything else.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Does she really believe the economy is doing as—

💬 Matt Doocey: Well, she’s giving a general debate, so it goes both ways.

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Matt Doocey will stand, withdraw, and apologise.

💬 Matt Doocey: I withdraw and apologise.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Does she really believe the economy is doing as great as she keeps saying when, just this weekend, there was a break-in at a food bank in South Auckland and, instead of stealing laptops or cash, they stole mince and butter, because her Government has allowed the cost of living crisis to spiral so far out of control?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: You will never hear me deny that there are families in this country that are doing it tough, which is why we have put tens of millions of dollars to support those very services that that member is now criticising the spending that we have put into it. I stand by the fact, as well, that we have increased benefits and finally restored the cuts that a National Government brought in the 1990s. I stand by the increases in the family tax credit, the increases in the minimum wage, the things that will try and reduce down the need on things like food banks, and healthy and free lunches in schools. Meanwhile, that member can’t have it both ways. He stands in this House, criticises that very investment for those families, and then promotes tax cuts for the wealthy.

💬 Christopher Luxon: What about her response to the young couple I met, a teacher and a nurse with good jobs and decent incomes, who are saving for their first home but their weekly rent is up $50, their grocery shop is up $100, and they’re spending $50 a week more on petrol, so instead of looking for a first home in New Zealand, now they’re looking for one in Queensland?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: And that member would want to come in and incentivise investors to come back into the market and squeeze them out. This is what I say to them: there is more to do, but we have increased wages for teachers and nurses. We have stood up and said that we will not stand by while we continue to see supermarkets take more profit out of Kiwis’ pockets than they should. Equally, we have grown the number of teachers and nurses in New Zealand. That member calls them bureaucrats and says he wants to cut them. I say to those families that we know it’s tough but you can be guaranteed that a Labour Government will keep investing in them as public servants in this country. You cannot say the same for National.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Does she have anything to say to the migrant family I recently met who have saved for years to buy a small section to build a three-bedroom home, but now their rent is up, the mortgage cost is going up, and with construction costs going through the roof, they’ve had to abandon that dream, sell up, and keep renting?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: What I would say is that you can see that every effort we have put in—be it on the Resource Management Act, be it on investing and infrastructure so that we can build houses, be it on public housing, closing off the tax loopholes for investors, evening out the playing field for first-time buyers, and first-home grants—that member has opposed. In fact, the very economic plan that he stands up with would make their situation markedly worse. It is the Bermuda Triangle of an economic plan, and that would surely see more people leaving these shores. And I can tell you, we can see the way that plan worked in the UK.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Will the Prime Minister act to address the estimated $1 trillion in wealth transfer to the wealthiest New Zealanders in the past two years, driving the very inequality being complained about today?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: In all of our efforts, you can see the work we have done to try and lift the incomes of those low and middle income earners in New Zealand, and, in fact, rather than just pointing to the initiatives, we can point to the outcomes. We have turned around the direction of all nine child poverty indicators in this country. Self-reported hardship has decreased. The number of people in hardship—

💬 Hon Louise Upston: That’s not accurate.

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I see now the National Party questions Stats New Zealand, but when it’s negative, they support those numbers. I’m actually pleased to see that New Zealanders are seeing an improvement in child poverty; it’s sad that the National Party aren’t.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Has she made the effort to go out and actually listen to a family who’ve seen their mortgage payments increase by hundreds of dollars a week while they struggle to afford basics, like food and petrol, and if so, how can she continue to stand here each and every week and claim that everything is fine and her Government has nothing to apologise or be accountable for?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I am more than willing to stand up and be accountable on every policy we’ve introduced to support those families: the cost of living payment, the investment to make sure that fuel comes down at the pump, half-price public transport, the family tax credit, the winter energy payment. It is not the answer for everything that every family is experiencing, absolutely not. But I am interested to know if that member’s willing to stand on his record, which is tax cuts for the wealthiest. Has that member stood in front of those families, looked them in the eye, and told them that they are worth $2—because that is his policy.

💬 Hon Eugenie Sage: Point of order. It’s quite hard to hear all of the Prime Minister’s answers because of the noise in the Chamber.

💬 SPEAKER: Yeah. I’ve tended to let things run, and I also know what the previous Speaker was talking about when he was talking about getting complaints from the public. Since taking over as Speaker of this House, I’ve taken on board the commentary from most of the parties in the House that they want a more robust question time. Robust doesn’t always mean it’s the loudest, but it tends to be the narrative that is common during question time. I thank the member for making the point of order, because she is actually correct. It is at the point where members cannot hear the answer. My general ruling about that is that the House doesn’t want to hear the answer, and that the Minister answering can pretty much say whatever they like in response to whatever the question is. The Minister could also just sit down, and I will rule, based on the fact that the House doesn’t want to hear the answer, that it’s been addressed. It’s really up to this House to decide what it wants. So if the House wants me to intervene every five minutes and blow the whistle, I can do that. It won’t be a very robust kind of question time, but it will address that issue. I say to the folks at home listening to question time: direct your emails to the people you think might be causing your distress. But I will say to the House: it’s really up to the House to decide how you want to move forward. I’m going to leave it there.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Thank you for your very reasonable response, which would be perfectly acceptable if it were not for the fact that, repeatedly today, in answering questions the Prime Minister has raised questions. And when those questions get raised in general to the House—and not specifically, because the Government cannot ask questions during question time unless it is by way of one of their allocated questions—then, of course, there’s going to be a response from this side of the House.

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: If we were to take Mr Brownlee’s view on board about the strict adherence to the Standing Orders in both answers and questions, virtually every question the Leader of the Opposition gave today would have been ruled out for its inclusion of epithets and assertions and assumptions, and so I think—

💬 Chris Bishop: Oh, rubbish.

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: I think that in a point of order we still have silence, Mr Bishop, I don’t think that’s changed. I think, Mr Speaker, what you have outlined to the House is an approach that you want to take that gives a robust exchange. You’ve put it into the hands of members as to how far that goes. That’s a reasonable position. We’ll see how the public react to that.

💬 SPEAKER: I will respond to the Hon Gerry Brownlee. He does raise a point, but I go back to my ruling on the matter: it’s really up to the House to decide. If we get to a point where parties or members are telling me to intervene, then I’m quite happy to do that. But as the Deputy Prime Minister has pointed out, a great many supplementary questions that I’ve heard since taking over probably would have been ruled out of order by previous Speakers of this House.

Question No. 3—Housing

3. to the Minister of Housing: Fakaalofa lahi atu, Mr Speaker. What actions has the Government taken to address the shortage of housing in Hastings?

In December 2019, the Government entered into a bespoke place-based partnership with the Hastings District Council, Ngāti Kahungunu, and other local partners. As of August 2022, it has delivered, compared to October 2017, a net increase of 166 public houses and around 70 renewals; 160 additional transitional housing places, with another 253 in the current pipeline; 44 affordable rental papa kāinga, plus infrastructure for a further 14 homes; repairs to 40 homes on whenua Māori; a homelessness hub; and infrastructure to enable 150 affordable homes.

💬 Anna Lorck: What investment has the Government made in housing infrastructure in Hastings?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Last week, we announced $18.5 million worth of investment throughout the Infrastructure Acceleration Fund (IAF) to improve road access and resolve capacity constraints in the district’s waste-water network. This was a joint application between the Hastings District Council and the Heretaunga Tamatea Settlement Trust. The council believes that IAF funding will enable around 4,000 new homes across multiple developments, including 380 on several papa kāinga developments, 670 affordable homes, approximately 1,300 public homes, and 1,650 market homes. Physical works are expected to commence next year.

💬 Anna Lorck: Why did the Government identify Hastings as a place to focus efforts?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Under the previous National Government, Hastings had a net loss—

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Yeah, that’s not a great way to start off an answer. You should just address the question.

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Hastings was chosen because between 2008 and 2017, it had a net loss of 192 public houses. Hastings was experiencing rapid population growth which outstripped consents, little new affordable or public housing supply, and there was limited council engagement in housing and infrastructure investment. Motel use for homelessness was high, and iwi had high levels of housing need but also high levels of housing aspiration. Hastings was chosen to trial the place-based partnership approach because of the high level of need and the willingness of the council and iwi to explore a different way of working.

💬 Anna Lorck: What change has there been in the number of households in emergency housing in Hastings as a result of this Government’s actions?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: The successes of this pilot has meant withdrawing from the use of motels for emergency housing. On 13 May 2022, 133 households were in emergency housing in Hastings. This is down to 65 households as of 7 October, allowing the Ministry of Social Development to withdraw entirely from the use of four motels. The Ministry of Housing and Urban Development is also withdrawing from motels as transitional housing, having exited 26 rooms at one location. This work is not complete, but we are showing how it can succeed.

💬 Anna Lorck: What impact has the housing repair programme had in Hastings?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Funded in 2019 as part of the place-based approach, the housing repair programme has focused on critical repairs on homes on whenua Māori where poor housing quality was repeatedly putting children in hospital. Across the two-year repair programme targeting 40 homes, 314 whānau members have identified and benefited from significant health improvements, including 119 tamariki aged under 10 years.

💬 Anna Lorck: What has made the Hastings place-based partnership so successful?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: A key factor has been strong leadership from the Hastings District Council and Ngāti Kahungunu and the willingness to think outside the box and beyond their traditional roles. There is a strong emphasis on jobs and skills development for locals. Ngāti Kahungunu is very active in partnering with Kāinga Ora through its construction company, K3. K3 provides pastoral support to construction sector apprentices and it supports opportunities for Māori businesses to grow and it will deliver 130 affordable rental properties through our Whai Kāinga Whai Oranga partnership.

💬 Chris Bishop: How many children are living in cars, tents, and motel rooms in Hastings?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: If the member had listened to answers to previous questions, the answer is far fewer, because we are starting to repair the damage of the net loss of 192 public houses under the previous National Government. If there are children in motel rooms in Hastings at the moment, it is because of the actions of the previous National Government.

💬 Anna Lorck: What is the housing pipeline in Hastings beyond the homes enabled by the Infrastructure Acceleration Fund?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: There are a further 500 homes in the Hastings partnership pipeline, and these include 130 affordable rentals to be delivered by iwi through Whai Kāinga Whai Oranga; 150 affordable homes to be delivered by the Hastings District Council; and 250 public and transitional housing places.

Question No. 4—Finance

4. to the Minister of Finance: When was inflation last in the Reserve Bank’s 1-3 percent target range, and when does he expect inflation to return to below 3 percent?

As has been the case since 1989, it is the Reserve Bank’s independent responsibility to manage price stability. The monetary policy remit sets out that the Reserve Bank’s monetary policy price stability objective is to keep future annual inflation between 1 and 3 percent over the medium term, with a focus on keeping future inflation near the 2 percent mid-point. The last time an annual headline Consumers Price Index (CPI) reading was between 1 and 3 percent was in the March 2021 quarter. In response to the second part of the member’s question, making such predictions is extremely difficult in the face of continuing global uncertainty. Bearing this out, there was a range of predictions when annual headline CPI inflation returned below 3 percent. For example, both the ANZ and BNZ’s latest published forecasts are for annual CPI inflation to be below 3 percent from the December 2023 quarter. The Reserve Bank, in its latest forecast, have CPI returning below 3 percent in the June 2024 quarter; Westpac from September 2024; and ASB during the fiscal year beginning July 2024. For comparison, the IMF is forecasting inflation to remain above 3 percent in Australia, Canada, the United States, and the UK during the 2024 calendar year; and in the euro area, during the 2025 calendar year.

💬 Nicola Willis: Does he agree with ANZ that the domestic inflation surge is looking worse by the day, and what domestic factors does he consider are driving inflation?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: In answer to the second part of the question, there are a range of factors that are driving inflation. These include the ability to access goods at a price—including from overseas due to supply chain constraints—labour supply issues, which are indeed challenging for many firms around the country. Many of the issues that the member describes as “domestic” remain heavily influenced by what is a global problem.

💬 Nicola Willis: Does the Minister accept that the Government’s immigration settings have contributed to severe worker shortages that are now driving up inflation and Kiwis’ household costs?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: What I accept is that the Government’s Immigration Reset has now seen around 66,000 job checks undertaken so that those positions have been approved to be recruited. We have more than 30,000 working holiday visas that have been approved. If the member is now wanting to rewrite history about the way in which New Zealand got through COVID and made sure that we actually kept New Zealanders healthy, that’s up to her. We don’t govern in hindsight; we govern in the present and our immigration policies are contributing as we move forward to New Zealanders having the labour force they need. I absolutely acknowledge—as I just did in the last supplementary answer—that labour supply is an issue in the New Zealand economy, and we are resolving it.

💬 Nicola Willis: Why, when labour supply is such an issue in the New Zealand economy, is his Government continuing to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to create Jobs for Nature, and is it sensible to be wasting taxpayers’ dollars on creating jobs when New Zealand farmers and businesses are crying out for those workers?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Well, this is an interesting development: members opposite touring around the country supporting the conservation initiatives, supporting the initiatives of primary industries to support the ability to not only help people get jobs but also protect our environment. Suddenly the National Party turns, but we’re seeing the real National Party now, aren’t we? They want more people out of work. That’s what the National Party want: more people out of work.

💬 Nicola Willis: Isn’t it the case that the Government’s inflationary programme of reckless spending, in which every dollar spent can be defended in the Minister of Finance’s world, and broken immigration settings are directly driving up mortgage rates for Kiwis?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: No. What is reckless is a party that would promise tax cuts for the wealthiest New Zealanders. Liz Truss has worked it out. They’ve dropped it, but not the National Party: they want a tax cut programme that would give rich New Zealanders thousands of dollars a year and those on the minimum wage $2 a week. Trickle-down economics, more people unemployed: that’s the National Party’s recipe.

💬 Nicola Willis: What does he say to the recent homebuyers who had to borrow massively to buy a house in the market his Government allowed to spin out of control, and who are now kept up at night in terror, worrying about looming mortgage refixing?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: What I would say to all New Zealanders is that we recognise that this is a tough time for many Kiwi households and businesses. That’s why we’ve stood alongside them through COVID, that’s why we continue to support low and middle income New Zealanders with policies to lift their incomes, which the National Party have opposed. I also say to those people: do they want a tax cut policy that would return a billion dollars to speculators and investors and take away that opportunity from first-home buyers?

Question No. 5—Prime Minister

5. to the Prime Minister: Fakaalofa lahi atu. Kia ora tātou. Does she have confidence in all her Ministers?

Fakaalofa lahi atu. Yes.

💬 Rawiri Waititi: How can she have confidence in her Minister for Children when 5-year-old Malachi Subecz died in Oranga Tamariki (OT) care after suffering months of abuse at the hands of his carer under Oranga Tamariki, despite multiple warnings from family members as to the safety of the child?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I have confidence in the Minister for Children because his entire focus is about preventing the kind of tragic and horrific circumstances that we’ve seen reported around the death of Malachi. There is additional work that’s being done alongside the report that’s already been released; we need to learn from all of them. But in the meantime, you can see the work and some of the outcome from the investments that have been made. They’re about prevention—stopping the uplift of children. Because we’re working much earlier with whānau, we’ve seen uplifts come down, we’ve seen greater investment in preventative care, we’ve seen greater partnerships with iwi organisations who know whānau and can work with them directly. But we have to try and do everything we can to prevent another circumstance like Malachi.

💬 Rawiri Waititi: Does she accept the findings of the Ombudsman that there were “a litany of failures” from OT leading up to Malachi’s death, including the failure to investigate multiple reports of concern and not considering the obligation under the Child Protection Protocol at any point?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I’m advised that Oranga Tamariki has accepted the findings of the Ombudsman. Important to remember that, of course, there is also the Oranga Tamariki practice review and the Government-wide system review as well. We need to understand every different contributing factor to the circumstances that led to Malachi’s death. I personally believe that we need to make sure that we have all such reports so that we can make sure we leave no stone unturned.

💬 Rawiri Waititi: Point of order, Mr Speaker. The question was clear. It was: does she accept the findings—not whether Oranga Tamariki accepts the findings.

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Yes.

💬 Rawiri Waititi: Is she concerned that accountability for Oranga Tamariki in these situations will be even more difficult under her Government’s new oversight regime, which weakens oversight to the point where the only watchdog will sit within the Education Review Office, of all places?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Actually, I think here the member is leaning very hard on the findings of the Ombudsman. In fact, the changes that have been put through this House reinforce the role of the Ombudsman and demonstrates that, actually, the Ombudsman has long held a role in investigating circumstances such as this. But I think everyone in this House wants to be in the position where we’re not at a point where it’s about receiving complaints about the experience in care, but we prevent children from entering care in the first place because we work with whānau to prevent these circumstances. No one wants to be in the situation we have—the Ombudsman monitoring these circumstances—because it led to tragedy in this case.

💬 Rawiri Waititi: Will she ask for the Minister’s resignation, given that no officials have been stood down, let alone fired, following this tragedy?

💬 Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: No, I will not. Also, I would add that we are still awaiting the Oranga Tamariki practice review which is equally important for us to get a full understanding of what’s happened here, as well. I would also just acknowledge, when I was Opposition spokesperson on children, yes, we must all keep calling for the change that’s required to protect our tamariki. But I will also always draw a distinction over what it was the Minister held personal responsibility for.

Question No. 6—Conservation

6. to the Minister of Conservation: How has Jobs for Nature supported employment opportunities and conservation efforts across the country?

Fakaalofa lahi atu, Mr Speaker. Jobs for Nature continues to provide positive outcomes for our natural environment by employing New Zealanders, up and down the country, to plant trees, build fences, and restore habitats. Across all Jobs for Nature projects combined, funding has been provided to support over 2.5 million hours of work to provide a positive and lasting impact on the social, economic, and environmental values of this unique region, as well as create an enduring conservation legacy.

💬 Rachel Brooking: What milestones have been met by Jobs for Nature since it began?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: Since the programme began in 2020, more than 2,000 kilometres of tracks have been maintained. That’s more than the length of the State Highway 1; 7,000 hectares of riparian planting, protecting New Zealand’s waterways, have been completed, which is the equivalent to 7,000 rugby fields; and 56,000 hectares of weeding has taken place, an area larger than the size of Wellington.

💬 Rachel Brooking: How has Jobs for Nature supported employment opportunities and conservation efforts in Southland?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: The Jobs for Nature project Te Tapu o Tāne is supporting the Southland economy by setting up three native plant nursery businesses, providing an ongoing environmental resource for the region through enhanced native tree supply, greater skilled labour, and wider knowledge of restoration practices.

💬 Rachel Brooking: What other Jobs for Nature projects have supported employment opportunities and conservation efforts in the regions?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: Jobs for Nature has been instrumental in retaining talent in our regions. On the West Coast, Jobs for Nature has leveraged off the existing restoration work at Bullock Creek by expanding the work further, with a focus on wetland restoration. The project will create up to 40 employment opportunities, and planting an estimated 478,000 native trees over 153 hectares of land.

💬 Hon Eugenie Sage: What benefits, if any, does she see in extending Jobs for Nature beyond its June 2024 end date, and what advice has she sought from the Department of Conservation on extending it?

💬 Hon POTO WILLIAMS: Sustaining the benefits and outcomes created by these projects is now a key focus area of the department. Prior to being allocated funding, projects are assessed against an investment framework, which included sustainability of outcomes. Many project partners have built this into project planning already, with iwi, council, community, or other groups committing to undertake maintenance work in future years or active plans in place to secure future funding.

Question No. 7—Justice

7. to the Minister of Justice: How much in financial reparations is currently outstanding to victims of crime, and what is the lowest amount being paid by instalment to a victim?

I’ve been advised that around $112 million in reparation payments are owing as of June this year, across multiple years’ worth of overdue reparations. Some offenders, though, are unable to pay or do not have a source of income—for example, if they are in prison—meaning that the lowest amount being paid would be zero. There has been a 10 percent decrease in reparations outstanding over the past three years. However, I have asked my officials to provide advice on making collection of reparation debts a higher priority, and I expect further improvements in this area.

💬 Nicole McKee: What does she say to Jeremy, who is still being drip-fed a court-ordered reparation of $600, 10 years after the initial order?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: I’d say to that gentleman that the reparation system, in my view and in the view of Government, is not working as effectively and efficiently as it should—10 years is far too long. Across all of Government, there is a work plan in place that looks at debt to Government. It is multi-agency and it looks at the prioritisation of what is extracted and at which point, and the priority that is given to each of those payments that are taken out. That’s a substantive piece of work and is one in which I expect we will see reprioritisation of reparation payments.

💬 Nicole McKee: Is the Minister aware that one victim is receiving reparation at the small amount of just 65c a week, and, if so, what initiatives does she have to ensure that this victim benefits from a victim-centric approach?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: Yeah, I am aware. I’m aware that some individual victims are paid 60c. As I said, some individuals are paid none due to whether or not an offender has any income at all. There is, as I said, a piece of work that’s happening across Government to look at the way in which the prioritisation of debt is paid, including reparations, and I think that we should see and will see improvements in this area.

💬 Nicole McKee: So what further considerations, if any, has the Minister made towards victim reparation delays using that victim-centric approach lens?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: The victim-centric approach lens is the one that I guess we have advocated for in the design of the programme that’s looking at all of Government—what is taken out of an individual’s weekly payments. You’ll be aware that there’s a multiple take that is taken out of an individual’s pay for childcare, other debts, and victim reparations. There is a piece of work that looks at whether or not the prioritisations of those reparations is fit for purpose. My view is it’s currently not, but we’re working on a piece of work to look at whether or not there need to be changes to those prioritisations.

💬 Nicole McKee: Does the Minister endorse ACT’s policy of reforming the reparations system so that the Crown faces the burden of risk of slow reparation payments or non-payments, rather than the victims of crime, and, if not, why not?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: New Zealanders, I think, rightly might have some concerns if it was the case that the Government was to bear the burden of debt for not just the victims but the vast range of areas where Government is aware individuals are seeking payments, whether those are things like child support payments, whether those are things like victim reparations, whether they are—there’s a broad range of areas. Currently, as I said in my primary answer, there’s over $100 million worth of debt that’s currently outstanding and owed. It would be a substantive policy decision for any Government of any ilk to take on that amount of debt, and it’s not one that I’m actively considering at the moment.

Question No. 8—Health

8. to the Minister of Health: What concerns does he have in Middlemore Hospital’s ability to provide health care, following the recent independent report which found the hospital’s emergency department was “unsafe, dysfunctional and overcrowded”, and reports that senior doctors have requested that the Royal Australasian College of Physicians consider revoking Middlemore Hospital’s General Medicine training accreditation?

Firstly, once again I acknowledge the family who is at the centre of this matter and, indeed, the member’s questions. I do have confidence in Middlemore Hospital to continue to provide care to the roughly 700 in-patients who are there right now and the expected 300 to 350 people who will turn up to their emergency department (ED) today. To the second part of the member’s question, I disagree that the solution to a doctors shortage is to train fewer doctors. There are approximately 500 doctors currently working at Middlemore Hospital who are in some form of formal training. That’s about 200 house officers in their postgraduate year 1 and postgraduate year 2, and 300 registrars. They are doing vital work, and I thank them for it. I am advised that the letter the member refers to was one sent to the Royal Australasian College of Physicians. The letter was not sent to me or to Health New Zealand. The college is independent, and I do not know if it has responded to the correspondence.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: Are the 60 doctors who signed a letter to the Royal Australasian College of Physicians correct when they wrote that there is a crisis at Middlemore Hospital, or are all 60 doctors wrong?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I have not seen the letter that the member refers to; it was not sent to me.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: Which other hospitals, if any, are also currently at risk of removal of training accreditation?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I’m not aware of any New Zealand hospital that is at risk of losing their training accreditation, and I am confident that our public hospital system—that, today, is looking after, roughly, 7,500 people who need their care and are being well looked after.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: What does he say to doctors at Middlemore Hospital who have stated, “We have given everything we have to provide care to our patients despite unprecedented staff shortages and the inevitable consequences of burnout, illness, and moral injury.”?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I will say again what I have said repeatedly, and that is that I think we have an outstanding health workforce, who have worked under incredible pressures this winter, and in the last two years, and I’m aware also of the vacancies that continue in our public health system. I am confident that Te Whatu Ora Health New Zealand and the Ministry of Health and the Nursing Council, and others who are involved in making sure that we have the health workforce that we need to fill those vacancies, are doing everything they can to expedite the arrival of people and the recruitment of people to fill those roles.

💬 Dr Shane Reti: Why should the sector have any confidence in a Minister who, in the same week, has a damning independent inquiry into a tragic ED death and then has 60 doctors at the very same hospital request that training privileges be revoked?

💬 Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I think that the health workforce can have confidence in a Government that has increased its funding of the health system by nearly 45 percent in the last five years and has invested nearly $7 billion in a rebuild programme for our facilities that were left to disastrously run down between 2008 and 2017.

Question No. 9—Māori Development

9. to the Minister for Māori Development: Fakaalofa lahi atu. How has the Government supported Māori into employment and training?

Through TPK—Te Puni Kōkiri—this Government has invested funding into employment and training programmes that are providing a by Māori, for Māori approach grounded in values of rangatiratanga and kotahitanga. These investments include the cadetships Pae Aronui, Taiohi Ararau—programmes which support Māori from all walks of life to lift their qualifications and gain employment.

💬 Arena Williams: How is the cadetship programme making a difference for Māori in employment and training?

💬 Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Our cadetship programme has been operating for just over 10 years, and in that time it has supported thousands of Māori kaimahi to improve their skills, wellbeing, employability, and earnings. We know from monitoring and evaluation just how successful the cadets programme is. It benefits businesses, employees, and communities. Our 2021 survey of employers showed that 90 percent of cadets were employed at the same organisation; 88 percent received a pay rise; 58 percent received a promotion within their organisation; and 94 percent believed the programme had prepared them for their long-term careers. In 2021, we supported over 1,300 cadets—and more than 100 employers—to gain work experience and improve formal and informal skills and increase their employability.

💬 Arena Williams: How is Pae Aronui making a difference for rangatahi Māori and employment and training?

💬 Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Pae Aronui is a programme to test innovative approaches to support rangatahi needs to achieve employment, education, and training outcomes in line with our aspirations. Over the past three years, Pae Aronui has been running a total of 749 places which were funded for rangatahi; 706, or 94 percent completed their one-year programmes; and 637, or 85 percent of participants, achieved employment and/or educated-related programmes.

💬 Arena Williams: How is Taiohi Ararau making a difference for Māori in employment and training?

💬 Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Thank you for that question. Taiohi Ararau is a programme supporting Taiohi needs to obtain their essential documents. This is really important—for example, their birth certificate, driver’s licence, IRD number, and bank account. This is a key step on their pathway towards education, employment, and training.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: This is boring.

💬 Hon WILLIE JACKSON: From the ongoing—I know this is boring for the Opposition—sad. But from the ongoing programmes in the North, which began in 2022, reporting shows that out of 168 participants so far, 49 have achieved employment outcomes, five have moved into training, nine have moved into education, 78 have achieved the birth certificate. Some wonderful results.

💬 Arena Williams: How is the Government committed to the ongoing success of these programmes?

💬 Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Thank you for the question. In Budget 2022, this Government has committed to the ongoing success of these programmes. Cadetship funding was baseline from $4.5 million to over $11.5 million in future years, which shows our continuing support for Māori into sustainable employment and training. An additional $7 million per annum was provided to extend the Pae Aronui programme for an additional two years and to expand into further regions to continue to test different innovative approaches. And an additional $1 million per annum was provided for two years to expand the Taiohi Ararau programme to test approaches for Taiohi need in additional regions and high-needs areas. This Government is doing so well with Māori at the moment.

Question No. 10—Justice

10. to the Minister of Justice: Does she have confidence in the Government’s approach to regulating the use and supply of all drugs, including alcohol?

I have absolute trust and confidence in the extensive work our Government has done in drug law reform, particularly with respect to regulation. I want to acknowledge the former Minister of Justice, Minister Andrew Little, for his work there. Though there is always further work to do—and one area I think our Government does agree that there is further room for work is in the area of alcohol policy.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Is she aware that in 2020, over 4,000 people appeared in court for cannabis offences, and, if so, does she endorse continued criminalisation of cannabis use and supply?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: I note that the Misuse of Drugs Act is not within my delegation; it’s within the delegation of the health Minister.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I’d make the point that the Minister of Justice is responsible for the facilitation of the criminal justice system, including our courts.

💬 SPEAKER: Sorry, what was your question again?

Chlöe Swarbrick: My question pertained to whether she is aware that in 2020, over 4,000 people appeared in court for cannabis offences, and, if so, whether she endorses continued criminalisation—that is, the criminal justice system and prosecution therein—of cannabis use and supply.

💬 Chris Bishop: Speaking to the point of order. The Minister of Justice is responsible for the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975.

💬 SPEAKER: I rule that the Minister should answer in so far as she does have responsibility—in particular, the first part of the question.

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: I am aware that since the 2019 amendments, total convictions for cannabis use and possession have fallen by 48 percent from 2,565 to 1,335. I’m also aware that in 2021 and 2022, 144 people were convicted of cannabis possession and/or use as their most serious offence. We’ve seen a substantive reduction in the way that New Zealanders have been prosecuted for personal use of cannabis. In addition, we’ll also be aware that here in Aotearoa, we have the clean slate legislation. So after somebody is convicted for a possession-like offence, their record will be expunged within seven years.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does she believe that one person convicted for cannabis use in this country is a fair outcome, when health data shows that more than 600,000 New Zealanders used cannabis last year alone?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: We’re in an interesting position here in New Zealand, because we did go out to the public at the last general election. We asked the public as to whether or not cannabis should be decriminalised here in New Zealand—

💬 Hon Members: Legalised.

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: Legalised; my apologies. Goodness me, it’s been one of those days! But what happened there is that the New Zealand public said “No”. And therefore that has meant that, with respect to further reform when it comes to the regulation of cannabis, whether or not things are legal or not—we went to the electorate and they said “No”. So whether or not I have a personal view or otherwise is redundant. We amended the law in 2019. In 2019, we enabled the discretion to sit squarely with the police as to whether or not they charge, and indeed we’ve seen a radical reduction since the introduction of those amendments in 2019.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does she believe that the presumption of supply for specified quantities of cannabis under the Misuse of Drugs Act is fair and reasonable given it contravenes the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act presumption of innocence?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: Again, the Misuse of Drugs Act does squarely fall within the purview and any amendments related to that fall within the purview of the Minister of Health. That is the presumption—

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Wasn’t a health question. Simple justice question.

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: No, the Misuse of Drugs Act, Mr Brownlee, is the responsibility of the health Minister.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Will she consider adopting my Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Harm Minimisation) Amendment Bill—which implements recommendations made in Government-commissioned reports such as the safe and effective justice review—as a Government bill?

💬 Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: I just want to acknowledge the member for her continued advocacy on drug law reform; including alcohol. I want to acknowledge the many members in this House that have advocated for reform of alcohol law policy. I’m looking particularly at you, Lydia, up there in the back—10 years on the front line. We will be introducing a Government position on the alcohol law reform. Your bill is a member’s bill, and our caucus will vote according to their conscience.

Question No. 11—Emergency Management

11. to the Minister for Emergency Management: Fakaalofa lahi atu, Mr Speaker. What recent reports has he received on the preparedness of New Zealanders for an emergency?

I was recently briefed by the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) on the results of the 2022 Annual Disaster Preparedness Survey, an independent survey that tracks how prepared Kiwis are for a disaster. The survey is an important reminder to get prepared. It found two in five New Zealanders said they were well prepared for a disaster; one third of us have taken steps to prepare themselves or their households for a disaster, in the past 12 months. The results also reflect the cycle of household preparedness spiking after a big event, but then tailing off.

But there are some positives. The survey showed that Kiwis have a sound understanding of natural disasters and their impacts, and that preparing for a disaster is all of our personal responsibility. Most people continue to know what actions they should take in an earthquake or tsunami, and over half view disaster preparation as being quite easy. Overall, this is a timely reminder to all of us that small steps taken now can help us all when an emergency strikes.

💬 Rachel Boyack: What advice does the Minister have for people who see effort and cost as a barrier to getting prepared for an emergency?

💬 Hon KIERAN McANULTY: Getting prepared is actually easier than one may think. It just starts with a conversation with your family or your flatmates to just make a plan. What would you do if an emergency strikes when you were not home? What would you do if an emergency strikes and the kids are at school? What is the plan for nana or grandad? Having a plan in place costs nothing but can save a life. [Interruption] I’m really disappointed that the National Party members wish to heckle during something that is so important but, nevertheless, maybe people at home may wish to see some examples by this Government that getting prepared for an emergency can make a big difference when an emergency strikes.

💬 Rachel Boyack: Where can people find information to help them get ready for an emergency?

💬 Hon KIERAN McANULTY: New Zealanders can find simple advice and tips at www.getready.govt.nz which has recently been translated into multiple languages, and people can also check out their local civil defence group to find out more about plans in their area. You’ll find information on what to do when a flood, landslip, earthquake, or tsunami hits—

💬 Simeon Brown: What about a by-election?

💬 Hon KIERAN McANULTY: —including how to get prepared and things to think about when developing plans. I see Simeon Brown heckling about the next election and a change of Government. That is appropriate, because this is about disasters, after all.

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Order!

💬 Rachel Boyack: What else is the Government doing to get Kiwis prepared for an emergency? [Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: No, we’re going to hear this question in silence, thank you. [Interruption] No, I want to hear that question.

💬 Rachel Boyack: What else is the Government doing to get Kiwis prepared for an emergency?

💬 Hon KIERAN McANULTY: NEMA launched its first national tsunami map, the Own Your Zone campaign, and the Get the Flood Out! campaign earlier this year, while continuing to promote the successful Long or Strong: Get Gone campaign. NEMA is also developing a new national preparedness campaign to encourage Kiwis to get ready. At 9.30 a.m. next Thursday, we are holding the New Zealand ShakeOut earthquake drill and tsunami hīkoi. People can join over 580,000 participants by signing up now at www.shakeout.govt.nz. This will be occurring during a parliamentary sitting day and I would encourage all members to participate and help spread the word for what to do during an earthquake and a tsunami.

Question No. 12—Police

12. to the Minister of Police: How much money has been paid out of the Retail Crime Prevention Programme to date, and how many businesses have had protective equipment installed since the fund was established in May this year?

on behalf of the Minister of Police: Fakaalofa lahi atu, Mr Speaker. On behalf of the Minister of Police, I’m advised that as at 14 October, $147,468 has been paid out from the programme, and a further $233,393 has been committed for further assessments and installations. In response to the second part of the question, 126 stores have been contacted, police have assessed 80 of these stores, and 59 have been allocated to a supplier for a site visit. Thirteen stores have either had products installed or are in the process of having products installed, seven are complete, and six have commenced installation. This is in addition to the thousand fog cannons that have been installed to protect businesses across New Zealand from robbery since 2020.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Does he accept that it’s an abject failure on the part of his Government that only seven businesses have received any form of physical support from the fund while, at the same time, there have been over 210 ram raids?

I don’t know how things were done when you were in the service, Mr Mitchell, but these days police make sure they put processes in place to ensure the integrity of every dollar spent. I support the police 100 percent to get on top of this, and I suggest you should as well.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Well, we were backed by a strong National Government and we actually arrested criminals back in my day, Mr Nash.

💬 SPEAKER: Order! Yeah, that question’s out of order. Have you got another one?

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. That’s exactly the point I was making with you, earlier. The answer that was given by the Minister to the previous question invited that response. Now, if you’re going to look at the Standing Orders, you can be liberal about the way they’re interpreted, but the one Standing Order for the asking of the question mirrors a question for the answering of a question. We always know it’s an unequal contest and the answer to a question will always be longer and probably have more points in it, but it should not have questions in it, and that’s exactly why Mr Mitchell would have responded the way he did. I think it’s unreasonable to cut him off.

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. This brings us back to the earlier exchange. Mr Mitchell’s question contained an assertion in it. If we were being strict about the Standing Orders, as Mr Brownlee would want, the question should have been ruled out before the answer even came.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: You can have an assertion if it’s in answer to a question.

💬 SPEAKER: Yeah, I have ruled on this earlier. I’ll reiterate what I have said before. When such questions are being asked, I’m going to assume that the member knows what they’re doing. If the member is saying to the House that they did not know, then they should say it. But if assertions are in there, I have said before, if that’s the part that the Minister would like to answer, then that’s what it is. The member also knows that to start a question with a commentary about the answer is out of order. That’s the end of the matter.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I am seeking your clarity on this, as my initial response, when I stood up, was in direct response to the Minister asking me what policing was like back in my day.

💬 SPEAKER: Yeah, and I called you based on you wanting to ask a supplementary. That was out of order, and I’ve ruled it as such.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: When the Minister said, today, at a meeting with ram raid victims, “I absolutely accept there is a crime emergency”—can he explain what a crime emergency is?

That there is a crime emergency. It is the reason why the Labour Government promised 1,800 more police when the previous administration said there was going to be no more. We’ve delivered well over 1,500 more police, and it’s the reason why the Minister has said to the police that we need to fast-track this. It’s the reason why a thousand fog cannons have gone in place. It’s the reason why we’re putting all these programmes in place to ensure that police listen and work with key stakeholders to come up with innovative solutions and strategies, and we are in the process of implementing these.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: So, as the Government haven’t been able to deliver their 1,800 new police officers, what does he say to police officers in Auckland that have had a net loss of front-line police officers in the last month?

When we came into Government, there had been a drop in police officers in the previous three years, and they, the previous National Government, had said to the then commissioner, “There will be no more police until 2020.” We changed that. There are now 1,500 more police on the beat, dealing with key stakeholders, arresting perpetrators, and keeping our communities safe.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: Does the Minister realise that under a soft-on-crime approach, the public is exposed to a ram raid every 15 hours in New Zealand?

The Nats voted against our legislation that increased penalties for gun crime—now, that is soft.

💬 Hon Mark Mitchell: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. That was a very short and concise question, and it wasn’t addressed at all.

💬 SPEAKER: No, it contained an assertion, and that’s what was answered.