Oral Questions

1. to the Minister of Housing: What progress has the Government made rebuilding New Zealand’s public housing stock?

I’m pleased to report that this Government has now delivered over 12,000 public housing places since October 2017. As of May 2023, this also includes over 10,000 public housing new builds. Our pace of delivery means this Government is delivering the most public homes since the second Labour Government under Walter Nash in the 1950s.

💬 Terisa Ngobi: How has delivery improved in the regions?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: We’ve made good progress in terms of regional delivery. In Gisborne, for example, there was a decrease of 33 Housing New Zealand homes between 2008 and 2017. Since we came into office in 2017, Gisborne has seen an increase of 71 public homes to May 2023. On the Kāpiti Coast there was a decrease of 14 Housing New Zealand homes between 2008 and 2017. Since we came into office in 2017, we’ve seen an increase of 24 public homes to May 2023. We are committed to public housing delivery across New Zealand, especially in our regions. Regional delivery will be a particular focus in the updated public housing plan, which I hope to announce in the coming months.

💬 Terisa Ngobi: How have the recent severe weather events impacted delivery?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Prior to the severe weather events, Kāinga Ora was on track in January to meet the Government’s ambitious public housing plans of delivering 3,400 gross homes by June 2023. However, as mentioned previously in the House, several projects have been impacted by these weather events—along with construction projects across those regions—which have caused delays. By the end of June, we will have delivered a gross of 2,600 public homes, with the additional 800 homes experiencing an eight-week construction delay. Kāinga Ora has been focusing hard on delivering in spite of the weather events and remains on track to meet this new date.

💬 Terisa Ngobi: What further work is the Government doing to support public housing?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Additional investment announced as part of Budget 2023 will fund 3,000 additional public housing places to be delivered by June 2025. This builds on the significant and ongoing investment in public housing. There are currently over 4,500 public homes under construction today. There will be a particular and continued focus on delivery in regions, new build supply, and partnerships with community housing providers, Māori, and iwi.

Question No. 2—Prime Minister

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

Yes. In particular, I stand by the Firearms Registry, which went live on Saturday, and it has so far seen 576 licence holders register 1,452 arms items. The register will provide us with a clear picture of guns in this country and will help stop firearms from being transferred into criminal hands. I also stand by the Corrections Amendment Bill, which is being read for the first time today, both in the House and, it seems, by the Opposition.

💬 David Seymour: Can the Prime Minister please tell the House and New Zealanders how many gang members or holders of illegal firearms have registered their firearms with her new $200 million register in the time she mentioned?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: I don’t have that figure on me. However, the point of this is to ensure we have a clear understanding and knowledge of where firearms are and who owns them, with the purpose of ensuring that they do not end up in criminal hands. I do need to just quote the Police Association president when discussing ACT’s promise to repeal the register: “ACT cannot claim to be the tough on gangs party when they lobby to remove the best opportunity to prevent gangs from arming themselves”.

💬 David Seymour: Is the Acting Prime Minister aware that spending per person on education has risen 8.4 percent faster than inflation since her Government has been in office, and, if so, can she really say that New Zealanders are getting better value for money in education when fewer kids are going to school and Kiwi kids are doing worse in every international comparison since her Government has been in office?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: I’m not going to apologise for being part of a Government that has increased spending in education. We take the education sector and the future of our children seriously. Also, I will note that when I’m out and about in my electorate, often I have schools pointing out the difference that the investment in property has made, pointing out the difference that free lunches in schools have made, and pointing out the difference that the amount of funding that we have put towards schools to cover off the need for them to charge donations to families—the difference that that has made. I’m very proud of our investment in education.

💬 David Seymour: If the Acting Prime Minister won’t apologise for spending more money, will she apologise for spending more money only to have fewer kids going to school, learning less? It’s all there in black and white—will she apologise for that?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: I could rattle off some more investments in education if that member would like, including the announcement that we made at Budget to make it 20 hours free for two-year-olds for early childhood education and to invest in public transport so that our children who need to catch the bus to school don’t have to pay for their transport. Those things make a difference. All of the initiatives I’ve rattled off: public transport; food in schools; period products in schools, even—they make a difference to whether or not kids will show up to the classroom, so I do not apologise for that.

💬 David Seymour: How is it possible that every time she’s challenged for spending more money to get worse results, she just lists more examples of spending that haven’t got results?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: I would refute the premise of that question and say that, actually, every time that member asks me a question in this House, it gives me an opportunity to talk about the importance of our investment and the achievements of this Government.

💬 David Seymour: Does she agree with Prime Minister Chris Hipkins when he said, “it’s not right for households to be tightening their belts if the Government doesn’t too.”, and if she does agree with that statement from the Prime Minister, can she see the problem with her constantly standing up and talking about spending and investment without being able to point to a single thing that’s actually got better at the end of the day for Kiwis?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Tightening our belts includes not promising New Zealanders tax cuts when they cannot be afforded and where, actually, there would be a requirement for there to be cuts elsewhere. Our Prime Minister, who I agree with always, has also made it clear that our focus as a Government is on the bread and butter issues affecting New Zealanders, and that was reflected very strongly in all of the investments that we saw at Budget 2023.

💬 David Seymour: Would the Acting Prime Minister like just one more chance to tell the people of New Zealand what measurable outcome or final result has actually got better under her Government that spends 25 percent more per person after inflation? Just one measurable thing—not an investment, but an actual improvement in the outcome for the money that is being spent on behalf of taxpayers.

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Thank you. I will do better than that—I’ll give that member two. Firstly, just referring to what was spoken about by our Minister of Housing and the 12,000 additional public houses that we now have in this country, that comes off the back of inheriting a housing crisis where a Government had left fewer public houses than what had been in place when they first came into Government. Secondly, I also just want to refer to a report that came out on incomes this week, citing that those on the lowest incomes—our beneficiaries—are over 40 percent better off in terms of their incomes, even when inflation is taken into consideration, than what they were when we took office.

💬 David Seymour: Who advised the Prime Minister to use housing as an example of something that’s got better under her Government when the prices are through the roof, rents are at record levels, and tens of thousands of people are living in motels under her Government?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: I certainly don’t need that member’s advice with regards to what will be in the content of my answer. I’m very proud of what we’ve achieved in housing. There is much more to do, and we are the political party and the Government to do that.

Question No. 3—Prime Minister

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

Yes, particularly this Government’s delivery of over 12,000 additional public homes since October 2017. One in seven of all public homes in New Zealand have now been delivered by this Government. On an annual basis, this is the most public homes each year since the second Labour Government in the 1950s. There is more to do, but after a decade where National left New Zealand with 1,500 fewer public homes than it started with and failed to invest in new ones, we are making progress.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Has New Zealand’s economy grown faster or slower than Australia’s in the last two quarters?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Certainly, we are in the fortunate position of our economy now doing better than what it was during pre-COVID times. In terms of how we are doing in comparison to Australia, if we look at some measures including the unemployment rate—which for New Zealand is at near-record lows, at 3.4 percent—comparatively, we are still doing well.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Point of order, Mr Speaker. It was a very clear question: is the economy growing faster or slower?

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: Speaking to the point of order, Mr Speaker, the member’s primary question asked around all Government statements and actions. You’ve ruled previously that members can’t expect very specific answers to very specific—[Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: I’d like to hear this, thank you.

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: Members can’t expect very specific answers to very specific supplementary questions when the primary question is as general as it was. Are you going to take any action against that, Mr Speaker?

💬 SPEAKER: No. I’ll rule on this: the question has been addressed.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Are any of Australia, the United States, Canada, China, Japan, or any other comparable country in the Asia-Pacific region in recession, or is it just New Zealand?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: If that member wants specific answers to specific questions, then I suggest that he put it in the primary question. However, I will say that, comparatively, with regards to our unemployment rate, with regards to our debt levels, and with regards to our exports, we are doing better than many. That doesn’t negate, though, from the fact that there are a number of New Zealanders doing it tough at the moment. We recognise that. We’re not alone—many countries are experiencing the same thing.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Can she actually name a country other than New Zealand with all of a high current account deficit, a large fiscal deficit, high inflation, high interest rates, and a recession?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: As I said, every country around the world is experiencing impacts from global inflation and the increases that ensue. We are not alone in this. We recognise that on the ground, that has an impact on New Zealanders. When we look at how we are comparing to other countries, though, we aren’t doing as badly, but we’re focused on making sure that we implement policies that are going to help New Zealanders in their every day.

💬 Christopher Luxon: So can she just name one country?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: I can name one country: Australia. I can name two countries: Australia and Canada. I can name three countries: Australia, Canada, Japan. I can keep going if that member would like me to.

💬 Christopher Luxon: What is the current account deficit, and why does it matter so much to the credit agencies?

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: 8.5 percent of GDP.

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Oh, thank you, finance Minister. I’ll recognise him: he said, “8.5 percent of GDP.”—thank you.

💬 Christopher Luxon: And why does it matter so much to credit agencies?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: I don’t have the answer to that question in front of me, but we can certainly follow that up with the member if he would like us to.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Why does her Government constantly try to claim credit for any success, but will then run a mile from responsibility when the New Zealand economy is underperforming the rest of the world?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: That is not fair, and that member knows that we are not underperforming with the rest of the world. We are focused on being as positive as we can as a Government in light of some of the challenges that we’re facing. We’re doing our best not to be wet, whiny, or losing the plot. We’re focused on making sure we’re doing things that matter for New Zealanders.

💬 Christopher Luxon: Isn’t it embarrassing that having set out to do things so differently, she’s got the same failed approach to the economy, the same failed Minister of Finance, and the same failing results?

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: No. What’s embarrassing is when someone says they supported the Crusaders since they were a child when they were 26 years old when the Crusaders were actually formed.

💬 SPEAKER: Supplementary, the Hon Grant Robertson. [Interruption] Any time now, Mr Bishop.

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: Can the Acting Prime Minister confirm that New Zealand’s level of public debt, at around 20 percent of GDP, is lower than almost every other country that we compare ourselves to; can she confirm that unemployment, at 3.4 percent, is in the lower third of the OECD; can the Acting Prime Minister confirm—

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Only two legs.

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: Oh, a question or not, Mr Speaker?

💬 SPEAKER: Yeah, the problem is you’ve already asked three.

💬 Hon Grant Robertson: Oh well, I’ll keep going then, and they can keep yelling, Mr Speaker, if that’s all right?

💬 SPEAKER: Well, not really. I think you should leave it there.

💬 Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: I can confirm those things, and I can also confirm that it is with the efforts of a great finance Minister that we have ended up in this position.

Question No. 4—Education

4. to the Minister of Education: What recent announcements has the Government made on extra support for the tertiary education sector?

Earlier today, the Minister of Finance and I announced that this Government will provide an extra $128 million funding over two years for tertiary education providers for courses at degree level and above. This is in addition to the 5 percent increase provided at Budget 2023, the most significant funding increase in 20 years. This funding will help maintain the quality and breadth of our higher education offerings and research capability in our tertiary institutions. This is vital for our students, our tertiary workforce, our broader research system, and for economic and social wellbeing in New Zealand.

💬 Camilla Belich: Why was this increase needed?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: Budget 2023 provided for a 5 percent increase—the most significant funding increase in 20 years—but when we began our Budget process, universities and other degree providers were forecasting enrolment increases. The opposite has occurred, and it is clear that there is a need for additional support. Presently, our tertiary institutions are experiencing an unexpectedly large decline in domestic enrolments and increased cost pressures. In addition, although international enrolments are increasing, they remain well below pre-COVID levels. Similar issues are being faced by tertiary providers worldwide. The Government has heard the concerns of the sector and has acted.

💬 Camilla Belich: What institutions will benefit from this increase?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: While recent focus has been on Victoria University and Otago University, other institutions have previously managed declines in student numbers. We did not want to disadvantage these institutions, which in some cases had already made difficult decisions. The funding boost will go to all degree-granting institutions. I will report back to Cabinet by the end of July on whether recently announced changes represent a threat to capability of provision of programmes nationwide.

💬 Camilla Belich: How will the Government ensure that higher education funding is fit for purpose going forward?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: Today, we announced the Government will review higher education funding, including the Performance-based Research Fund. The current financial situation of some tertiary institutions points to the need to take this broader look into the way our higher education system is funded and financed. Today’s funding announcement is a temporary boost for two years. We need to take a thorough look at the funding system during this time. The Government remains committed in supporting and working with the tertiary sector so it meets the evolving needs of students and continues to make a critical contribution to the research and innovation in Aotearoa.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Will the review of the tertiary education funding model put the voice of students front and centre in the terms of reference in light of research which finds, for example, two-thirds of students regularly cannot afford the basics?

💬 Hon JAN TINETTI: Absolutely, it will, and I look forward to working with students to hear about their concerns over the next few months.

Question No. 5—Finance

5. to the Minister of Finance: What advice, if any, has he had about the impact a new asset tax, such as, for example, a wealth tax, would have on the New Zealand economy, particularly in light of economic recession and the cost of living crisis?

The Government, as all Governments do, seeks and receives a range of policy advice on New Zealand’s current tax settings. For example, we received advice on various new taxes, such as a wealth tax, from the Tax Working Group. The Tax Working Group produced an entire second volume of its final report on the taxing of the gains of assets—in particular, a capital gains tax. Treasury has regularly provided me and past Ministers of Finance with advice on the merits of asset taxes, including a capital gains tax, the impacts of which Treasury has said to include improved capital allocation and greater equity in the tax system. The impact of any taxes such as these is very dependent on their design and the subsequent use of the revenue. As previously stated in the House, the Government has no plans to introduce any such tax in this parliamentary term.

💬 Nicola Willis: Has the Minister sought advice on tax policies recently agreed to by the Labour Party policy council, which I’m told recommend income tax reductions funded by a large new asset tax, together with a 45c tax rate for incomes $200,000 and higher?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I’m obviously not responsible inside this House for the Labour Party’s policy council, but I can provide helpful advice to the member that that’s been the position of the Labour Party conferences over many years.

💬 Nicola Willis: Well, has the Minister of Finance received official advice recently on proposals of that sort, and, allegedly, sought by the New Zealand Labour Party?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I reject the connection that the member is making in her question.

💬 Nicola Willis: Has the Minister of Finance shared advice prepared as part of the Budget process with the Labour Party?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: No.

💬 Nicola Willis: Does the Minister of Finance think a wealth or asset tax of the sort proposed by the Green Party would be good or bad for the New Zealand economy?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As I said in my primary answer, the Government has no intention of introducing a tax of that sort this term.

💬 Nicola Willis: Does the Minister of Finance agree that in the middle of a recession and cost of living crisis, it would be reckless to impose a new asset and top tax on the New Zealand economy, sending a wrecking ball through our economy, resulting in job losses, capital flight, and lower growth?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: What would be reckless is proposing tax cuts at a time at which our public services are under extreme pressure and when the Government’s job, in part, is to help the Reserve Bank with bringing down inflation. That recklessness is the mark of the National Party’s policy.

💬 Nicola Willis: Would the Minister like to take this opportunity to rule out introducing an asset or wealth tax while he is Minister of Finance, or does it remain firmly on the table, just after the election?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I thank the member for her confidence in the return of the Labour Government and my ongoing role as Minister of Finance. I stand by my previous answer.

💬 Nicola Willis: Why does the Minister of Finance think it is reckless to reduce people’s personal income tax, but it is perfectly responsible to impose an asset or wealth tax on the New Zealand economy when it is particularly fragile, in recession, and enduring a cost of living crisis?

💬 Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I did not say that. What I said was it was reckless at a time at which public services were under extreme pressure to be looking at across-the-board tax cuts that deliver very little to low-income earners. Rather, what I think the responsible approach is is to support people with cost of living increases and invest in our public services. The member will have to explain how she thinks she can do what she wants to do with her policy and properly fund public services—it doesn’t add up.

Question No. 6—Health

6. to the Minister of Health: What is the Government doing to reduce the cost of healthcare from 1 July?

This Government is proudly reducing the cost of healthcare for New Zealand households by removing the $5 copayment on prescription medicines. Removing the $5 charge will make it easier and cheaper for New Zealanders to access the medicines they need, having a meaningful impact for many households, particularly those with multiple prescriptions to fill on a regular basis. This Government is committed to ensuring our health system provides equitable access for New Zealanders so they can have the health services when they need and where they live.

💬 Tangi Utikere: How many people will benefit from the removal of the $5 prescription fee for medicines?

💬 Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: An estimated 3.5 million New Zealanders will no longer have to worry about having enough money in their account when they collect their medication. This will also benefit more than 800,000 New Zealanders over the age of 65 who received prescription medicines in the community last year and will no longer have to cut their pills in half or take it every second day. Last year, over 440,000 prescriptions for oral contraception were dispensed. From 1 July, that will be free.

💬 Tangi Utikere: Why is the Government removing the $5 prescription fee for medicines?

💬 Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: The $5 charge is a barrier to some New Zealanders getting the medicines they need. Removing the charge makes it easier and cheaper for New Zealanders to access medicine, having a meaningful impact for many households, particularly those with many prescriptions to fill. By removing the $5 co-payment on medicines, we’re investing in the simple treatments that can prevent chronic conditions becoming emergencies that need hospital treatment.

💬 Tangi Utikere: How will the policy be implemented on Saturday?

💬 Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: From 11.59 p.m. on 30 June 2023, no standard $5 prescription co-payments will be charged to people who collect their prescription from a pharmacy. People don’t need to do anything different from what they usually do—just turn up for the pharmacy and get their standard medicines for free.

Question No. 7—Justice

7. to the Minister of Justice: Does she agree with independent victims’ advocate Ruth Money, who says that discounts to sentences for convicted criminals are “getting out of control”, and how does allowing for sentence discounts to reach 73 percent fit with her stated pledge to be “victim-centric”?

on behalf of the Minister of Justice: I agree that perpetrators of crime need to be held to account, and the more serious the crime, the greater the punishment justified. I note that the Government has not lowered any penalties for individual offences since we have been in office. Decisions on sentences are matters for the judiciary. There are no central sentencing guidelines because the last National-ACT Government axed them and the Sentencing Council. I respect Ruth Money for her advocacy, and I agree with her statement from 21 April in relation to a new bill the Government will be introducing to expand victim rights, when she said, “get in behind this”. On being victim-centric, the Government is proud of its track record. Since National left office, our Government has tripled funding for victim assistance schemes, doubled the funding for victim support, passed the sexual violence Act to improve outcomes for victims, and is establishing pilots to improve victims’ safety and ensure they’re heard in bail decisions, and to strengthen support for child victims of sexual violence.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does she think that Parliament should not be able to amend the Sentencing Act in response to what MPs on this side of the House, at least, regard as a widespread sense across the country that there are insufficient consequences for crime?

I, like every other politician in this House, respect the sovereignty of this Parliament to change the law. In respect of prison populations, New Zealand’s prison population is similar to Australia’s and is higher than in England and Wales, Portugal, Spain, France, Korea, Canada, Austria, Germany, Iceland, and Japan. We do not have low rates of imprisonment in New Zealand.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does she agree with National’s policy to take more than $6 million a year currently sent to Harry Tam and others to produce written cultural reports and to redirect it to provide extra funding to help the victims of crime?

Those reports are prepared under section 27 of the Sentencing Act 2002, which is very old legislation, and they can be requested by a court where an offender is appearing for sentence. The person or people from whom those reports are sought is not controlled by Government; that’s controlled by the courts in those court processes. That said, the Minister of Justice is on record in her concern for that cost centre growing, and has asked the Ministry of Justice to look at it.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: Is she comfortable with life-long Mongrel Mob member Harry Tam boasting on his website that defendants have received sentence discounts of up to 35 percent because of factors raised in his company’s cultural reports, and inviting people to contact him then for a quote?

As I said in response to the last supplementary question, the Minister has asked the Ministry of Justice to review changes in practice. When section 27 of the Sentencing Act was introduced, I’m advised that those reports were normally verbal. There’s become a habit where they are becoming expensive written reports. There is a question as to whether that is being appropriately controlled, and therefore the Minister has asked the Ministry of Justice to look into the matter.

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: When she said in her stand up on Sunday of Chris Luxon, “He’s talking about being tough on crime, soft on crime. We don’t talk about those things. We talk about what works.”, was she thinking about the issue from the perspective of the victims of crime, and, if so, can she understand that the victim of a serious assault or a rape might not think this system is working when their attackers receive only home detention?

When she was reflecting on whether National is tough on crime, she was reflecting on the fact that between 2009 and 2013, 30 police stations closed, police funding was frozen relative to inflation, and they defunded the Police, which is why police numbers fell under their watch.

Question No. 8—Social Development and Employment

8. to the Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment: What recent announcements has she made about Peke Waihanga?

Last week, I announced the opening of the new, state-of-the-art Peke Waihanga - Artificial Limb Service facility in Christchurch. I was pleased to open the new facility alongside their chief executive, Sean Gray, and board chair, George Reedy. The new facility features seven new clinical spaces, including three purpose-built rehabilitation areas. It also includes specific manufacturing technology for prosthetics and orthotics to be made in-house. Importantly, patients and amputees have had direct input into the design of Peke Waihanga, and that has led to this facility being truly designed around the needs of its users. This is a big step forward for an organisation that does extremely important work, and I am proud that this Government has been able to support it through a $6.1 million investment.

💬 Sarah Pallett: How will the new centre support amputees and those at risk of amputation?

💬 Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: This facility will support over 600 amputees and nearly 3,000 others. In addition to providing high-tech prosthetics, Peke Waihanga also supports patients through a peer-support service that provides support to those adapting to limb loss by matching them with trained supporters who have themselves adapted to limb loss. The centre also supports those who are at risk of needing an amputation due to conditions like diabetes, through the provision of preventative measures such as orthotics. The advanced technologies in this centre, such as high-tech 3D printers will also mean, I’m told—when I visited the centre—that wait times for prosthetics will generally reduce from what used to be about a full day to just 90 minutes.

💬 Sarah Pallett: How will this new facility support South Island communities?

💬 Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: The new Peke Waihanga facility is a great addition, and it will future-proof the region and the South Island to respond to the increasing demands of the ageing population and the implications of chronic disease. The development of the new centre builds on our Government’s investment in the disability sector, alongside other investments like the additional $863 million in Budget 2023.

💬 Sarah Pallett: How will this new facility help to advance medical practice in prosthetic and orthotic care?

💬 Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: Medical students in their final year at Otago University will now be able to co-locate at the centre. This will enhance the students’ understanding of prosthetic and orthotic care and will provide research opportunities to improve patient care in the future. This is a truly exciting initiative, and I’m proud to be part of a Government that has supported it.

Question No. 9—Children

9. to the Minister for Children: Is he confident children in the care of Oranga Tamariki are safe; if not, why not?

The allegations that recently came to light are of grave concern to me and, as I have said previously, are totally unacceptable. Oranga Tamariki has appointed Mike Bush to undertake a rapid review of the specific allegations, as well as a broader review of how residences are operating. Oranga Tamariki has made the right call, and he will get to the bottom of what’s going on. I have a clear expectation that young people in any type of facility are supported and safe.

💬 Harete Hipango: How many allegations has he been made aware of since the beginning of the year involving Oranga Tamariki staff acting inappropriately in residences?

💬 Hon KELVIN DAVIS: I can’t give an exact number, but what I can say in terms of children in Oranga Tamariki care—so that is all children, including those in the community and with families—there have been 453 children who have findings of harm. Unfortunately, we can’t go back beyond 2019 because the previous Government didn’t collect that data, so we are not able to compare the numbers through now and previous to this Government.

💬 Harete Hipango: Will the rapid review into Oranga Tamariki’s community-based homes also consider the actions of the four employees who remain suspended on paid leave from an Oranga Tamariki care and protection residence in Christchurch closed two years ago as a result of the investigation into the use of excessive force by Oranga Tamariki workers; if not, why not?

💬 Hon KELVIN DAVIS: So the circumstances around that investigation are Sir Wira Gardiner at the time, who was the acting chief executive, immediately implemented the child protection protocol. That involved police doing an investigation, which took over a year. The situation around the now three workers is currently before the Employment Relations Authority, and that process needs to be allowed to happen.

💬 Harete Hipango: Does he think it acceptable for an Oranga Tamariki employee to continue working at the Oranga Tamariki facility where and when there has been an allegation of sexual abuse made by a teenage resident against that staff member?

💬 Hon KELVIN DAVIS: That allegation was made and police were involved in the investigation, and they did not come to a conclusion around that.

💬 Harete Hipango: Does he accept that the youth residents in Te Puna Wai ō Tuhinapo, the youth justice facility at Rolleston, Christchurch, are safe and properly supervised when there have been at least two reported, separate incidents in just four months of youths taking to the roof of the facility?

💬 Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Every child deserves to feel safe and secure in these residences. The incident that occurred at Te Puna Wai over the weekend was attended by police, with the safety of the other children in residence and of staff the top priority. Obviously, this incident and the response will be looked into, and if anything needs to change, it will.

Question No. 10—Housing

10. to the Minister of Housing: Is she committed to ensuring everyone on the public housing waiting list has an accessible, affordable, and healthy public home to live in; if so, why has her Government not committed to funding the public housing building programme beyond June 2025?

In answer to the first part of the question, yes, through a combination of our continued commitment to public housing, affordable rentals, and affordable housing settings more broadly. I’m proud that since 2017, we have delivered 12,000 more public homes. That is the most public houses being delivered each year since Walter Nash’s second Labour Government in the 1950s. In answer to the second part of the question, a future Labour Government will continue to build on the successive increases we’ve made to public housing since 2017. For example, when we came into Government, there was $900 million in baseline for income-related rent subsidy (IRRS) funding. In Budget 2023, there is now $1.6 billion—almost double what it was in 2017. It is this increased funding that has allowed for the largest housing-build programme adding to our State houses since the 1950s. We may be building the most public homes each year since Walter Nash, but we recognise the job is not done.

Ricardo Menéndez March: What is the estimated number of people that will still be on the public housing waiting list without a secure home in five years, based on the current number of public homes projected to be built by her Government?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: As I said in the answer to the primary question, the way in which we clear a public housing waiting list isn’t only through the provision of public housing. For example, this Government has committed $350 million to work with community housing providers to rebuild a missing part of the New Zealand housing system, and that is in community-led, affordable rental properties. That will be an important part of the solution. Of course, a continued commitment to building public houses is a critical part of that, and I look to the 21,000 places that this Government has funded through to 2025. My only regret is that that is only just making up for the 20,000 fewer houses that we have in New Zealand today as a result of nine years of a National Government who did not build houses, and they ended up with 1,500 fewer houses, even after you account for the transfer to community housing providers. We’d have 20,000 more houses today.

Ricardo Menéndez March: What is the number of people that will still be on the public housing waiting list in five years, based on her current commitments, who sign up to the public housing waiting list to go into State housing?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I’ve given the answer to that in previous questions. It is impossible to give that number because there are a variety of ways in which people come off the public housing waiting list. Some of that will be into affordable, community provider - led housing, rather than through IRRS funding. Some of the people on the public housing waiting list, for example, may be youth who can be funded in some of the youth facilities that the member’s colleague is rolling out as part of her Budget funding. There’s a variety of ways in which that can be achieved, so it’s impossible to give that member that number.

Ricardo Menéndez March: If she acknowledges in her primary answer that there is more work to be done, why has her Government not committed to funding the public housing building programme beyond 2025?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: We have funded the public housing build programme out to 2025. It will be up to each and every party in this House in their costed manifestos—costed manifestos—to show what their commitment is to public housing, both in terms of the capital needed for building but also in terms of the operational funding required to fund additional places. Labour will stand by its record. You do not add the most number of public houses since the 1950s without having a deep commitment to public housing like the Labour Party does.

Ricardo Menéndez March: Why does Kāinga Ora not collect data on how many times they’ve had to apply for consent to build higher density, and how does she know if planning barriers are holding back high-quality, medium-density public housing?

💬 Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Kāinga Ora, obviously, does collect data around how it’s doing in terms of its intensification. It’s a large part of the work that we do in our large-scale projects, which is the redevelopment of several neighbourhoods in Auckland and, of course, the work that’s going on here in Porirua, closer to where we are. Density and intensification is a critical part of how we will increase our supply, but it is not the only way, because one of the areas where our Government is committed to focusing on delivery for the additional 3,000 places funded in this year’s Budget is building in some of those regional towns and centres that have not seen additional public houses for decades.

Question No. 11—Health

11. to the Minister of Health: What options is Te Whatu Ora considering for the repurposing or alternative use of the more than 17,839,000 rapid antigen tests (RATs) that as of 12 June had either expired or will not be dispatched because they are nearing expiry, and what does it cost Te Whatu Ora each month to store these expired or expiring RATs?

There was no crystal ball when the pandemic hit New Zealand. Minimising waste in the health system is always a priority. At a time of uncertainty and short global supply, it made it necessary to purchase large orders. This Government made the decision to be as prepared for the ongoing pandemic as possible, and stock was purchased to prepare us in the face of significant risk and uncertainty. Stockpiling is routine in pandemic preparedness and management. In answer to the first part of the question, I’m advised Te Whatu Ora are considering a range of options to mitigate product waste through expiry date extensions and deferring orders where possible. Te Whatu Ora continue to investigate ways to minimise the environmental impact of waste and provide a sustainable approach to the disposable COVID-19 products. They are actively scanning the market for these solutions. In answer to the second part of the question, I am advised that Te Whatu Ora does not have specific information on the warehousing costs of the expired component of the stockholding.

Brooke van Velden: Where are the rapid antigen tests being stored and by which organisations?

💬 Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: Te Whatu Ora has stored the rapid antigen tests in a warehouse that they have contracted. I’m happy to give the member the name of the supplier, if they put it on notice.

Brooke van Velden: Who owns it, and how much are they spending on the contract?

💬 Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: I’m happy to provide the cost of the warehousing overall for the member if the member puts that question on notice.

Brooke van Velden: Is she seriously saying she cannot answer how much they’re spending on storage of the expired or expiring RAT tests and does not know where they are being stored or by whom?

💬 Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: No, I am saying that Te Whatu Ora does not have specific information on the warehousing costs of the expired component of the stockholding.

Question No. 12—Health

12. to the Associate Minister of Health: What recent measures have been put in place by the Government to help increase vaccination rates and accessibility to healthcare for mums and babies?

Last Friday, I was excited to launch, alongside Uri Ririki - Child Health Connection Centre, a new hauora van in Tāmaki-makau-rau, which will help protect hapū māmā, their pēpi, and tamariki from preventable diseases such as the flu and whooping cough. Being immunised is one of the best things we can do to protect ourselves, our whānau, and our communities. To lift our vaccination rates, our health services should be accessible and take different approaches to overcome potential barriers, and that’s what the hauora van does. It takes immunisation to where the people are and even lets vaccinators park outside a home, allowing hapū māmā to access the services right on their doorstep.

💬 Steph Lewis: How will these measures increase accessibility to healthcare and vaccination rates?

💬 Hon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME: Mobile health vans provide an accessible and convenient way for hapū māmā to provide antenatal immunisations, which is a key priority in Tāmaki-makau-rau in particular right now. There are several barriers to getting antenatal vaccinations, including time pressures due to work, as well as some hapū māmā who may feel anxious about getting a vaccine while pregnant. Our caring health kaimahi know how to engage and answer these concerns, and the hauora van means they are right there in our neighbourhoods to work their magic. Along with the mobile clinic that was launched on Friday, a sister van will be launched next month with similar details, promoting immunisation to our tamariki.

💬 Steph Lewis: What other services will the hauora vans be able to provide?

💬 Hon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME: Beyond being a moving billboard for immunisation, these vans are multi-use purpose-built health units. They have features like handwashing stations and electric chilly bins for vaccine storage. The vans can also be used for cervical screening and health checks, and will be able to be present at local events in conjunction with community providers. They’ll also be used to support immunisation in our secondary schools, as well.

💬 Steph Lewis: Why is it important to increase access to antenatal immunisations?

💬 Hon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME: The evidence is clear that antenatal vaccinations keep pēpi and māmā safe from serious diseases—for example, pregnant people can be three to five times more likely to be hospitalised with influenza than those who are not pregnant. However, as of December 2022, the antenatal influenza vaccination rate was only 38 percent across Auckland region. Measures such as these hauora vans are a further example of how the Chris Hipkins Government is focused on the fundamentals by increasing access to healthcare and investing to improve health outcomes for all families.