Oral Questions to Ministers

Asked by: Hon BARBARA EDMONDS, Answered by: Hon NICOLA WILLIS

Will she rule out partially privatising Kiwibank?

Well, what the member defines as partial privatisation is another mystery in the Labour Party policy agenda.

💬 Hon Barbara Edmonds: Who should Kiwis believe when just yesterday morning, Christopher Luxon and Simeon Brown said they were looking at asset sales and will have an announcement soon, then the Minister has ruled them out, then Simeon Brown rules them out, and then, just a few hours later, she puts asset sales straight back on the table, as reported by the media?

Well, that question is full of mischaracterisations.

💬 SPEAKER: Question No. 6. [Interruption] It would be a really great question time if there were actually no members here at all—I’d just read them to myself.

Agriculture

Question No. 6

Asked by: MILES ANDERSON, Answered by: Hon TODD McCLAY

to the Minister of Agriculture: Is the Government considering a land tax on farms and orchards?

No, we will not be implementing a land tax on farms and orchards, just as we will not be implementing any new taxes. Instead, the Government is keeping taxes low so all New Zealanders, including rural New Zealand, can keep more of what they earn and have more choices about what they and their families can do with their money.

💬 Miles Anderson: What reports has he seen about a land tax on farms and orchards?

Well, I’ve seen a report by a reputed and respected commentator and journalist that says about land tax that “An average sheep and beef property could face around $43,400 a year; an arable farmer, nearly $49,000 a year.”, and they said, “That, folks, is $1,000 a week.” This would of course be even more if there were other taxes like a capital gains tax or a wealth tax. Instead of more taxes, the Government will continue to support farmers and growers to grow, like with Investment Boost, so that people can invest and innovate, grow their businesses, and create more higher-paying jobs.

💬 Miles Anderson: Has he seen any other reports about a land tax?

Well, yes, I’ve seen a report of a land tax being described as “fantasy posing as policy”. That could well be said about any new tax that would harm New Zealand households and rural New Zealanders, sending our economic recovery backwards. This is why the Government won’t be implementing a land tax or any new taxes on New Zealand farms or orchards.

💬 Miles Anderson: Has he seen any other reports about taxes on farms and orchards?

Yes—a report by Federated Farmers about the harm that a land tax and any other tax would do to rural New Zealand. Simon Donald Roy Cameron of Federated Farmers, as well as Winston Peters—sorry, Winston Churchill; I often look and confuse the two of them—and Winston Churchill both said: “For a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.” Minister Peters could well have said that. That’s why we have ruled out a land tax, a capital gains tax, a wealth tax, a ute tax—in fact, every one of the new taxes I have seen proposed by others this year.

Health

Question No. 7

Asked by: Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL, Answered by: Hon SIMEON BROWN

to the Minister of Health: Does he agree with the Minister of Finance’s statement that “We’re currently recruiting 2,300 new nurses”; if so, what is the expected growth in nursing FTE from recruiting these nurses?

Regarding the first part of the member’s question, in the context it was made, yes. Regarding the second part of the member’s question, I’m advised by Health New Zealand that in relation to that statement, all 2,378 roles are fulltime-equivalent (FTE). As would be expected, I’m advised that the exact net growth in nursing FTE would depend on a range of factors, including normal workplace movements such as retirements, resignations, and parental leave.

💬 Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Point of order, Mr Speaker. The second part of the question was: what is the expected growth in nursing fulltime-equivalents from recruiting these nurses? Now, the Minister was speaking into his chest a little—it was hard to hear his full answer—but I don’t believe there was a comment on the expected growth from those 2,300.

💬 SPEAKER: Well, he did say that the exact number would be dependent on a number of usual employment factors. I think that was a reasonable address to the question.

💬 Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Does he stand by his statement that the nursing turnover rate is 8.4 percent, and, if so, is it also correct that Health New Zealand needs to hire 3,000 nurses just to keep a workforce of 35,000 nurses at the same size?

Yes, the turnover rate, I am advised, has decreased from 11.7 percent in September 2023 to 8.4 percent in March 2026, which shows that the retention of our nursing workforce is improving. Ultimately, that is why we are continuing to recruit to both fill vacancies and to grow the workforce.

💬 Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Is it correct that the Government could be recruiting 2,300 nurses and not be growing the nursing workforce at all?

Well, the member is asserting an annualised figure and applying it to recruitment that is happening right now to fill vacancies and to grow the workforce. Ultimately, we are focused on growing our nursing workforce, filling vacancies, and that’s why Health New Zealand is recruiting to so many roles right now, today.

💬 Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Is the Government committing to a net growth of 2,300 nurses?

We’re committing to growing our workforce, filling vacancies, and ensuring that we are recruiting as we have been since we came to Government, with 2,100 additional nurses since we came to Government.

💬 Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: When will net growth of 2,300 nurses be achieved by?

Well, as I said in my answer to the primary question, as would be expected, there are other factors, including normal workforce movements such as retirements, resignations, and parental leave. My expectation for Health New Zealand is that they fill vacancies, grow the workforce, and also grow the services that are delivering for New Zealanders.

💬 Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Why should New Zealanders believe that after only hiring 54 nurses over two years, and after repeated attempts to conflate gross hiring with net growth of the workforce, they’re actually going to start hiring nurses again?

We are hiring, as I said in answer to the primary question. Health New Zealand is hiring 2,378 fulltime-equivalent roles now, and we’ve hired an additional 2,100 nurses since we came to Government. There is more work to do and we’re getting on and getting it done, whilst also improving on all of our health targets.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Can I ask the Minister: how many times has Ayesha Verrall asked that question, and when do you think the facts will sink in?

💬 SPEAKER: Well, you can’t be commenting on other members. Can I—

💬 Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Especially when they’re right.

💬 SPEAKER: Just a minute. Can we go now to question No. 8; I call Dr David Wilson.

Police

Question No. 8

Asked by: Dr DAVID WILSON, Answered by: Hon CASEY COSTELLO

to the Associate Minister of Police: What recent announcements has she made about fighting organised crime?

Earlier this month, I announced that the Government is establishing a multi-agency chief executive board (CEB) on Transnational, Serious, and Organised Crime (TSOC). There are a huge range of agencies that have a role in fighting organised crime, and establishing clearer governance and stronger accountability across the system, with a ministerial lead, was a core recommendation from the ministerial advisory group on TSOC. TSOC groups are sophisticated, well networked, and commodity agnostic. They will do anything to make money and will exploit vulnerabilities. This executive board will help deliver a better-organised Government to fight organised crime.

💬 Dr David Wilson: Why is this an important move?

It is important because organised crime is too big a challenge to ignore or not tackle head on. These people don’t care about the damage they cause. Illicit drugs drive cycles of addiction, poverty, violence, and murder. Money made in drugs is supporting international criminals to invest in their businesses and do even more harm. But this is about more than drugs. Organised crime affects every New Zealander every day. It’s why we now live in a world where we have to question the legitimacy of every email and message we receive. Organised crime also undermines legitimate business, drives exploitation and people trafficking, and syphons away Government revenue. Making New Zealand a much harder place for organised criminals to do business is our best chance to protect New Zealanders from all of this harm.

💬 Dr David Wilson: How are we progressing our response to transnational, serious, and organised crime?

I’ve now met with all the chief executives involved in our response to organised crime. I’m intending for the CEB to have its first meeting in October, at which point they will have their priorities and an initial work programme established. I would add that we haven’t been standing still until the formation of the board. Without getting into an exhaustive list, in the last year we’ve made real progress on actions from the TSOC plan, including adding an additional money-laundering team at Police, posting more customs and police staff offshore, and strengthening capability and cooperation in the Pacific. This has seen huge amounts of drugs stopped offshore and at the border, and in the last year, the Police organised crime group seized 200 kilograms of cocaine, close to a tonne of meth, and 137 firearms. Encouragingly, recent waste-water results are showing decreasing meth use, and we want to see this trajectory continue.

💬 Dr David Wilson: What examples, if any, can she provide of successful cross-agency work to tackle organised crime?

We’ve seen, in recent media, 14 large-scale grow houses shut down in just one operation—a testament to what’s possible when agencies use all of their powers to identify and take action on organised crime activity. I’ve previously announced an action group on illicit tobacco, where Customs, Police, Health New Zealand, and the Ministry of Health have joined forces to target and dismantle the illicit tobacco trade. The previous siloed approach meant that we weren’t using all the tools available to us for the illicit trade. Now, we’re better coordinated and more proactive.

Revenue

Question No. 9

Asked by: DAN BIDOIS, Answered by: Hon SIMON WATTS

to the Minister of Revenue: Is the Government considering ending Investment Boost?

No, Investment Boost is tax savings for businesses to enable a stronger, more productive economy. We want New Zealand businesses investing, expanding, and growing, because when businesses grow, they create jobs, they lift wages, and create more opportunities for New Zealanders. Investment Boost is about backing businesses to do exactly that.

💬 Dan Bidois: Why is Investment Boost important for growing the New Zealand economy?

If we want higher growth and a more productive economy, we need New Zealand businesses to be growing and investing. That means buying new machinery, farm equipment, vehicles, technology—that all helps them produce more and be more productive. Investment Boost helps make those investments more affordable by providing an immediate 20 percent deduction for eligible new assets.

💬 Dan Bidois: What evidence has he seen that Investment Boost is encouraging business investment?

Early evidence is very encouraging. Inland Revenue found that businesses who were aware of Investment Boost said it was increasing how much they invested. Looking ahead, almost half of businesses planning to invest over the next five years said Investment Boost was having a positive effect on their plans. That tells us that Investment Boost is doing what it was designed to do: getting businesses investing and growing.

💬 Dan Bidois: Did the Government consider putting a cap on the amount a business could claim through Investment Boost?

The Government deliberately chose not to impose an arbitrary cap on Investment Boost because our Government doesn’t want to cap aspiration or economic growth. Putting barriers in the way of productive investment, or introducing new taxes, is the last thing we should be doing if we want New Zealand to be a high-growth economy.

Commerce and Consumer Affairs

Question No. 10

Asked by: ARENA WILLIAMS, Answered by: Hon CAMERON BREWER

to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs: Ngā mihi o te wā o te Wiki o te Reo Māori, Mr Speaker. Why does he defend sustainable price rises when one in three Kiwi households are struggling to afford food?

I do not defend high grocery prices. New Zealanders, as I have repeatedly said, pay too much for groceries. What I support is low and stable inflation, rather than inflation running at 7.3 percent, as it was in 2022. The Government is also working to increase grocery competition by making it easier to consent and build supermarkets, improving overseas investment pathways, strengthening competition settings and supplier protections, and backing Commerce Commission enforcement. I would also note that independent cost-benefit analysis, released today, estimates restructuring Foodstuffs could be worth around $200 to $1,300 a year per household by full roll-out.

💬 Arena Williams: Are the supermarkets gouging New Zealanders, or is he telling the people who are worried about the price increases of 88 percent for butter, 33 percent for milk, and 31 percent for lamb, since his Government took office, to “cry me a river”, like his Prime Minister?

As I have repeated said, and I will repeat again, New Zealanders pay too much for their groceries, and that is why we are doing the work that I just outlined. But if I can also point out that food price increases for the year to July 2026—the past year—were 1.9 percent. That compares to 12.5 percent to the year to June 2023, under the last Labour Government.

💬 Arena Williams: Are we up to the third—[Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Wait, wait, just wait. Okay.

💬 Arena Williams: Are we up to the third or the fourth or the fifth review that the Government has done to find out whether the supermarkets duopoly still controls around 80 percent of the market, and prices continue to rise?

This Government is doing a lot of work that I continue to outline. I can read that paragraph again. I would note that under the last Government, when they had an absolute majority and 65 MPs, food prices went up nearly 22 percent in three years.

💬 Arena Williams: When is his Government going to finally deliver on the commitment from Nicola Willis to lower grocery prices?

As I have said, I would encourage the member to get on to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment website and review for herself the independent cost-benefit analysis that shows what could be achieved through potential structural reform.

💬 Hon Nicola Willis: Can the Minister confirm that, in fact, lower food prices have been delivered across several grocery categories in the last 12 months, including chicken, down 4 percent; tomatoes, down 29 percent; eggs, down 15.5 percent; and tinned spaghetti, down 6 percent?

I can confirm all of those. But, most notably—[Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Hang on. Just a bit of calm.

Most notably, I can confirm that fruit and vegetables are down 1 percent in the past year, compared to increasing by 22 percent in the year to June 2023 under the last Labour Government.

💬 Arena Williams: Why is he highlighting—

💬 SPEAKER: Just a moment. Just a moment.

💬 Arena Williams: Why is—

💬 SPEAKER: Hang on a minute. There is far too much noise coming from the Government benches.

💬 Arena Williams: Why is he highlighting his hard work to bring down the price of spaghetti when this tin of spaghetti [Member holds up tin] has come down 1c under National?

If I can—[Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Just a minute. I know that a topic like spaghetti excites the House. You add in a bit of pineapple, and the place is out of control. Can we just, please, let the answer flow.

💬 Hon Nicola Willis: Supplementary.

💬 SPEAKER: No, you’ve still got one.

💬 Hon Dr Megan Woods: He’s still got to answer.

💬 SPEAKER: Just a minute. I’ll tell you what we’ll do: we’ll try and be really nice—no, we won’t have the question again; just answer the question.

Even a small decrease in prices is a lot better than the huge increases that they saw under the last Labour Government in food prices.

💬 Hon Nicola Willis: Can the Minister confirm that in one single 12-month period under the last Labour Government, tinned spaghetti went up 35.4 percent, and is it the view of the Minister that if members opposite wish to cherry-pick price increases for particular goods, including mince, including bread, and including toast, then they should be aware that two can play at that game?

I can confirm those numbers.

💬 SPEAKER: That was, while the question was being asked, completely unacceptable interjection. We’re moving on, we’re moving on. We’re moving on. He’s got to answer a question.

💬 Hon Kieran McAnulty: Point of order. Mr Speaker, I certainly don’t dispute that, but order in this House is a two-way street, and if Ministers are quite clearly going to refer to the other side of the House and that isn’t pulled up, there’s only one option available to us, and that is to respond.

💬 SPEAKER: Yeah, but the member will also know that it’s quite acceptable for Ministers to refer to historical matters that might have been the circumstance when they came into Government. I thought that question was right on the edge of that, but we’ll get a quick answer, and then we’ll move on to Arena Williams.

I always agree with what the Minister of Finance says. Can I put the contrast? There is no better contrast than fruit and vegetables falling by 1 percent in the past year, compared to increasing by 22 percent under a year under the Labour Government.

💬 Arena Williams: Is that what Kiwis deserve—1c off a tin of spaghetti and a letter from National to the Commerce Commission asking them to do a review?

What they don’t deserve is a 22 percent increase in food prices that they saw in three years under the last Labour Government. Our work continues, and our results will be a lot better than what they achieve, even with an absolute majority.

Prime Minister

Question No. 11

💬 DEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER: E te Pīka—[Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: Hang on. Just stop all the conversation. Are we stopping the conversations?

💬 Rt Hon Christopher Luxon: I wasn’t talking.

💬 SPEAKER: No, you’re not, but the people behind you are. Debbie Ngarewa-Packer and no one else.

Asked by: DEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER, Answered by: Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON

to the Prime Minister: E tautoko ana ia i ngā kōrero me ngā mahi katoa a tōna Kāwanatanga?

[Does he stand by all his Government’s statements and actions?]

Yes, and I want to reassure the member that we won’t be introducing a capital gains tax that would put a wrecking ball through the economy.

💬 Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Does his Government have any plans to increase community ownership of electricity generation so that communities share in the benefits generated from their whenua, wai, and natural resources?

Our real focus is making sure we increase the supply of electricity across the country. That’s what we’re doing, with a renewables boom under way. We’re also making sure we’ve got thermal energy in place to support lower wholesale electricity prices.

💬 Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Will he rule out spending an additional $1 billion on oil and gas exploration under any Government he leads?

Well, again, liquefied natural gas plays a very important part, as you’ve seen. Wholesale electricity prices are down 35 percent under this Government as a function of a much more sensible, reasonable energy policy, unlike the Labour-Greens proposal of an oil and gas ban, which shot up wholesale electricity prices to $800 per megawatt hour. That led to regional mills closing and working people, who they used to care about, losing their jobs.

💬 Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Supplementary. [Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: We’re just waiting. In the meantime, can we remove that visual aid off the bench there. It’s clearly causing a high degree of distraction across the House. When we’re all quiet, Debbie Ngarewa-Packer.

💬 Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Why did his Government abandon the 100 percent renewable electricity target while committing public money to expanding the fossil fuel supply?

Well, look, I think this is just really quite illustrative of the other side’s poor understanding of energy policy, because under a Labour-Greens Government, they killed oil and gas and sent a chilling effect right through international investment. We ended up importing Indonesian coal rather than domestic gas.

💬 Hon Kieran McAnulty: Point of order. Aside from the fact that what the Prime Minister is saying is untrue—[Interruption]

💬 SPEAKER: No, hang on—hang on. Wait—wait. Hold on.

💬 Hon Kieran McAnulty: All right—inaccurate.

💬 SPEAKER: Hold on. I can work out where you’re going with this. Just make the point of order and let me rule on that.

💬 Hon Kieran McAnulty: Speaker’s ruling 205/4: he cannot bring parties that aren’t involved in the question into it. He’s done it the last two times. In fact, he’s done it the whole term, but since you’re pushing back on it, I’m going to raise it today.

💬 SPEAKER: Right. We’ll just have an answer directly to the question without any other extraneous matter being brought in. Debbie Ngarewa-Packer, ask your question again.

💬 Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Why did his Government abandon the 100 percent renewable electricity target while committing public money to expanding fossil fuel supply?

Because it raised energy prices and people lost their jobs.

💬 Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Of the 31 permits that were stopped, how many were producing in that period?

If the member would like to put that question in writing, we’ll make sure she gets a proper answer.

💬 SPEAKER: Funny how you ask a question if you know the answer, but anyway, can we have a supplementary. Have you finished?

Prime Minister

Question No. 12

Asked by: CHLÖE SWARBRICK, Answered by: Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON

to the Prime Minister: E tautoko ana ia i ngā kōrero me ngā mahi katoa a tōna Kāwanatanga?

[Does he stand by all of his Government’s statements and actions?]

Yes—in particular, our desire never to introduce an inheritance tax.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Should Woolworths and Foodstuffs be allowed to continue making excess profits of $1 million a day as New Zealanders struggle to afford their groceries?

Well, that’s why you’re seeing announcements from us this morning on that.

💬 Hon Kieran McAnulty: Point of order. Sir, the Prime Minister is answering on behalf of the Government. The Government has not made an announcement on that today.

💬 SPEAKER: That is a point. I think the Prime Minister could answer that in a different way.

Well, we agree, having looked at all the previous reviews of the previous Governments where nothing changed and nothing happened, that there is a real structural problem in the supermarket sector. It’s important that in the future that is addressed.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does the Prime Minister understand that his officials’ analysis shows that the biggest possible benefit for consumers to achieve more affordable groceries would be breaking up both Woolworths and Foodstuffs?

I disagree, given the analysis I’ve seen on that.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Why does he think that New Zealanders can publicly own an airline but not a supermarket?

Because I have visions of a Labour-Greens Government sending bureaucrats up and down this country, going into supermarkets with clipboards, assessing the price of oranges and Weet-Bix and everything else, and I’d just say that is not the answer. That is a Soviet step backwards, big time.

💬 Hon David Seymour: In the Prime Minister’s experience of employing people, would running a cafe in Mount Eden for three weeks qualify you to run a supermarket?

💬 SPEAKER: Wait on. Sorry. People may want to interject, but don’t. We’ve had one member leave the House. We’re nearly there at the end of question time, and so we’ll have the Hon David Seymour’s question without any interference.

💬 Hon David Seymour: In the Prime Minister’s experience of employing people, would someone who ran a cafe in Mount Eden for three weeks be qualified to run a supermarket chain?

Well, I have to give the Greens credit, because they are actually—

💬 SPEAKER: No, no. Sorry.

Chlöe Swarbrick: If 2022 Christopher Luxon said that intervening in the supermarkets would be a “disaster”, and 2026 Christopher Luxon is advocating for structural separation of supermarkets, just how long will it be until Christopher Luxon starts advocating for a publicly owned supermarket with an affordability mandate?

💬 SPEAKER: The question has just being pulled up because the Prime Minister answered as leader of the National Party when he should be answering for his Government, so there’s a different way you could put that question.

Chlöe Swarbrick: What exactly is the difference between public ownership of an airline and public ownership of a supermarket?

💬 Hon Todd McClay: Supermarkets don’t fly.

Well, the bottom line—

💬 Hon Members: Ha, ha!

💬 SPEAKER: Sorry, that may be amusing to some, but not particularly to me. The Prime Minister will answer and we’ll have the answer without any comment from anyone.

Sorry, can the member repeat the question.

💬 SPEAKER: Just a minute.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: Try and try again.

💬 SPEAKER: Oh, Mr Peters, please. We want to move on. It’s the last question.

Chlöe Swarbrick: What exactly is the specific difference between public ownership of an airline and public ownership of a supermarket?

Look, as I said, the thought that we would have bureaucrats and officials roaming around with clipboards trying to implement the—[Interruption] No, no, hang on. Calm down. Calm down, people, calm down. It’s all good. Calm down.

💬 SPEAKER: Right. OK, absolute silence for the balance of that answer, which should be very brief.

I want to thank the Green Party for contributing to solving a problem that we have in our supermarket sector with their idea. I don’t support their idea, but at least they have an idea and a policy unlike what we’ve seen from—

💬 SPEAKER: That’s it; don’t bring them into it. That ends—[Interruption] That ends oral questions. Members and people in the gallery need to leave without making any noise.

I declare the House in committee for consideration of the Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill.