Oral Questions

1. to the Minister of Agriculture: Has he seen the call in the Climate Shift plan, released last week, to “Transition intensive dairying to low emissions farming by phasing out synthetic nitrogen fertiliser and imported animal feed, reducing herd size, and banning new large-scale irrigation schemes”; if so, does he support it?

To the first part of the question, yes, I have seen the Climate Shift 10-point plan released last week. To the second part of the question, the Government is already committed to supporting our primary producers to reduce their emissions and lift sustainability credentials on farms. That’s why we’ve invested more than a billion dollars over consecutive Budgets to develop emissions reduction tools for farmers, to fund over 200 catchment groups to restore water quality within a generation, and to research innovative on-farm practices to improve environmental outcomes.

Teanau Tuiono: Does he agree with Rod Oram, who in a recent article said, “The call is to cut agricultural emissions in ways that improve farms and the ecosystems on which they utterly depend. For example, reducing stocking intensity, diversifying crops, increasing soil carbon and rebuilding biodiversity will make them more sustainable.”?

Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR: I don’t agree with everything that Ron Oram says, but a lot of that article I do agree with. Yes, we do have to work with our farming sectors to develop the techniques—the technology—to reduce emissions from our agricultural systems. That doesn’t necessarily mean cutting stock numbers or cutting production. We think we can do both—that is, increase the profitability, the production, and reduce emissions.

Teanau Tuiono: Does he agree that overuse of synthetic nitrogen fertiliser is leading to water pollution, and, if so, will he consider stronger measures on fertiliser?

Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR: The Government introduced a cap on synthetic nitrogen fertiliser of 190 kilograms per hectare. The sector seems to have addressed the challenges of that. We’ve seen a lift in gross export earnings from our productive sectors, including the farmers, at the same they have cut back on their use of nitrogen. I don’t believe that we should cut it out completely, as that report suggests.

Teanau Tuiono: What support, if any, will he provide to organic farmers to maximise the benefits of the organic products Act changes?

Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR: This Government facilitated the passage of the Organic Products and Production Bill, which ensures there’s consistency and accreditation for organics production in our country. That will boost certainty and confidence in the organic sector. There is, I understand, a challenge at the moment with their lead organisation facing some financial challenges. We’re happy to sit down and talk with them. In the end, though, the industry has to be able to grow up and to fund itself into a sustainable future.

Teanau Tuiono: Does he agree that farming in Aotearoa cannot possibly be sustainable as long as it relies on imported PKE feed that can lead to deforestation overseas and further undermine climate progress, and, if so, what will he do about it?

Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR: The use of PKE—palm kernel expeller—is a very small part of the total feed budget in our country. It was originally introduced off the back of a drought, and so there will be, from time to time, the need for supplementary feeds like PKE. The overdependence on that is something that Fonterra sought to intervene on, and that is limiting the amount of PKE that can be fed to a cow per day. So, I think, over time, we’ll see a reduction in the reliance on that and a move back towards more sustainable systems on farm. I think that’s good for us all.

Question No. 2—Finance

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

We know 2023 is a challenging year for New Zealand, the global economy, and New Zealanders. However, there are reasons for optimism. New Zealand continues to produce the goods and services that the world wants. This is shown in the new Situation and Outlook for Primary Industries, which is forecasting that primary industry exports will reach a new record high of $56.2 billion by the end of June—above earlier estimates. The growth is led by dairy, seafood, and processed food exports. Looking ahead, the report is projecting primary industry exports to grow to $62 billion by 2027.

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

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Well, Statistics New Zealand has reported that employment rose for the fourth month in a row, with filled jobs rising by 13,193 or 0.6 percent in April, taking the total number of jobs to 2.37 million. The services industry has continued to drive the gains, with the rest mainly coming from the goods-producing industries. On an annual basis, the biggest gains were in accommodation and food services, followed by healthcare and social assistance, manufacturing, transport, postal and warehousing, and administration and support services. By age group, the largest gains, in terms of the number of filled jobs, were for 35- to 39-year-olds, followed by those aged between 30 and 34 and then 15- to 19-year-olds.

Shanan Halbert: What reports has he seen on net migration and its impact on the economy?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Last week, Statistics New Zealand reported that there was a net gain of 5,800 people arriving in the month of April and 72,300 people for the year. I believe our immigration reset is working and attracting the overseas workers with the skills that businesses need to help rebuild the economy. Yesterday’s announcement around changes to the skilled migrant category will simplify the pathway to residency and further support businesses to recruit internationally and fill vacancies.

Shanan Halbert: What reports has he seen on the international context for the New Zealand economy?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The World Bank is forecasting the global economy to slow from 3.1 percent in 2022 to 2.1 percent in 2023 and then bounce back slightly to 2.4 percent for 2024. This emphasises that it is a difficult time for the global economy and that this will flow through to New Zealand. But we are well positioned to face the challenges ahead, with unemployment near record lows, growing exports, and public debt levels well below those of countries that we compare ourselves with. Inflation is high, but it is heading in the right direction. We know New Zealanders are doing it tough, and the Government is striking a balance to support them in the here and now while continuing to invest in public services and a resilient infrastructure network.

Question No. 3—Prime Minister

3. to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in all of his Ministers?

on behalf of the Prime Minister: Yes, because those Ministers have worked hard to see us in a position where we have 77,000 fewer children in poverty; delivered 12,000 new public homes, after a decade of cuts and neglect; hired more than 4,200 more nurses; reduced class sizes for years 4 and 8; supported 1 million New Zealanders a year with the cost of their power bills with the winter energy payment; scrapped the $5 prescription co-payment; delivered 63 million free lunches, to 950 schools and kura, to over 220,000 learners; increased Pharmac funding by over 40 percent; delivered 1,800 extra police; concluded four free-trade agreements and upgraded existing agreements with Singapore, China, and ASEAN member States; achieved record levels of R & D expenditure, up 67 percent since 2014; tripled the number of electric vehicles coming into New Zealand, including Teslas; consistently achieved record low unemployment; established fair-pay agreements—I could go on, but I won’t unless I’m asked to. I’m very proud of what our Ministers have achieved.

Nicola Willis: How can he have confidence in his Minister of Finance when he has allowed the cost of living crisis to drag on for two years while presiding over the biggest drop in per capita GDP since the last Labour Government?

Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: I am really glad that that member has asked that question. It gives me an opportunity to say why I have trust and confidence in our finance Minister. That Minister led us through a global pandemic and has taken us to a place where we are much better placed than many other countries are. Globally, inflation has gone up. That member continues to ignore the fact that New Zealand is not alone in this, but our economy is better placed now than what it was before the pandemic. Our unemployment rate is still at near record lows, at 3.4 percent. And just one other example: that Minister of Finance delivered, alongside his favourite Minister, the Minister for Social Development and Employment, a wage subsidy that saved thousands and thousands of jobs and businesses. I am very proud of our Minister of Finance.

Nicola Willis: Does the Prime Minister think the Minister of Finance has the enthusiasm and determination needed for the economic fix-up ahead when, when asked about the recession, he has nothing but excuses, blaming a cyclone that didn’t hit the country until four months after the recession had started?

Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Can I thank that member for giving me the opportunity to speak more about our Minister of Finance. As I said, we are doing comparatively better than a lot of the world at the moment, but we acknowledge—and the Minister of Finance on a daily basis acknowledges—that New Zealanders are doing it tough at the moment. We see it. We’re in those communities. We know it. That is why that Minister of Finance delivered a Budget where we saw the $5 prescription co-payment removed. We saw 20 hours’ free early childhood education (ECE) applied to two-year-olds.

Chris Bishop: How does that apply?

Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Mr Bishop said, “How does that apply?” That applies because childcare is one of the most expensive in-work expenses that families have. That finance Minister has ensured that our children get free public transport and young people under 25—or between 13 and 24—get half-price public transport. I want to thank that finance Minister, and I hope that member gives me another opportunity to talk about him.

Nicola Willis: Does the Prime Minister have confidence that the Minister of Education is taking seriously enough concerns raised by the educational watchdog the Education Review Office, who highlight that student attendance and achievement is plummeting and of serious concern; and does Minister Tinetti have enough time to focus on this in between sessions at the Privileges Committee?

Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: I have absolute confidence in our Minister of Education. I am really grateful that we have a person in that position who intimately understands how the education system works, has committed her life to children and the education system, and now has an opportunity to serve in this Parliament and in this Government to make decisions on behalf of that education system that she cares so deeply about. I could go on about the number of achievements that have been attained under Minister Tinetti’s watch, but I’ll just give a couple: firstly, the reduction of class sizes for years 4 to 8—that Minister is responsible for that. Secondly, I want to point out, again: 20 hours’ free ECE for 2-year-olds—thank you very much, our Minister of Education.

Nicola Willis: How many schools have actually got an extra teacher out of the policy she just listed as the major achievement of the Minister of Education?

Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: If that member wants that level of detail, she should put it in writing or perhaps ask the Minister of Education that question herself.

Nicola Willis: Does the Prime Minister have confidence in the Minister of Revenue, who, while overseeing a huge increase in the tax take, is busy designing new taxes and allowing his department to spend $30 million redecorating and refurbishing its offices?

Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: I don’t really understand how that member could expect me to criticise our Minister of Revenue for doing his work. That is what he is there to do: to look at the tax system, to explore options, and to provide advice and inform his Cabinet on what he thinks the lay of the land is and where we could go potentially. He’s doing a great job—he’s doing his job.

Nicola Willis: Well, could the Prime Minister then please tell us what he’s told him the lay of the land is and where he might take us on tax?

Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Right now, we don’t have a tax policy at this point in time. We have said on a number of occasions that it will come in due course. That member will just have to wait. She will find out at the same time the rest of New Zealand does.

Question No. 4—Immigration

4. to the Minister of Immigration: Can football fans from non - visa waiver countries wishing to take advantage of this month’s release of additional tickets for the 2023 FIFA Women’s World Cup come to New Zealand to watch games that start in 28 days, and how many days does it currently take Immigration New Zealand, on average, to process 90 percent of visitor visa applications for non - visa waiver countries?

To the first part of the member’s question, yes, provided they have the appropriate visa when they board their flight to New Zealand. And to the second part of the question, in May 2023, over 49,500 visitor visa applications were received by Immigration New Zealand. Of those, on average, it took seven working days to process visitor visa applications—75 percent were processed in 20 working days and 90 percent were processed within 35 working days.

Dr James McDowall: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Regarding the second leg of the question, I asked how many days does it currently take Immigration New Zealand on average. On every day, there’s a rolling figure of 90 percent, and the Minister referred to the previous month.

SPEAKER: Can the Minister remind me what you actually answered for that part.

Hon ANDREW LITTLE: Yeah, so I’m happy to repeat the second part. In May 2023—so the latest figures for the latest month of figures available—49,500 visitor visa applications were received, and I said it took seven working days to process, on average, across all of them. It took seven working days to process visitor visa applications—75 percent were processed in 20 working days and 90 percent were processed within 35 working days.

SPEAKER: That actually answers the question.

Dr James McDowall: Point of order.

SPEAKER: New point of order?

Dr James McDowall: Yes. Specifically, Mr Speaker, I’m asking, and it’s on notice, about non - visa waiver countries. The Minister, by using visa-waiver countries in that total, is skewing that information.

SPEAKER: It’s not really for me to judge the quality of the answer. It definitely has been answered. You can use your supplementaries to get more information out of the Minister, so I suggest you do that.

Dr James McDowall: Has he seen the comments made by a FIFA boss in a Newstalk ZB article this afternoon where she states, “this is going to be the biggest sporting event this country has seen.”, but they’re keeping a close eye on New Zealand as there are still concerns about empty seats, and is he confident that the Government has done enough with our immigration settings to welcome fans from non - visa waiver countries in the three years since the games were announced?

Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I haven’t seen those particular comments from that representative of FIFA, but there are two comments I would make. I stand by and applaud the work of our Minister for Sport and Recreation for the outstanding leadership that he has provided in working with FIFA and, indeed, Australian authorities, in an enthusiastic and energetic application to ensure a great tournament. But the comments of FIFA that I am aware of are those on its website, where FIFA says, “Fans are encouraged to complete their respective visa applications as early as possible”. FIFA goes on to say on that same website, “The Australian and Aotearoa New Zealand Governments expect a higher-than-normal number of applications, as such processing times may take longer than usual.” I’m very thankful that FIFA is sensitive to the demands placed on the immigration system of Aotearoa New Zealand, which they have reflected in their advice to fans.

Dr James McDowall: Is he aware that FIFA has stated that, in addition to the 250,000 tickets released this month, further ticket allocations may be released over the coming weeks, and, if so, will a single fan from a non - visa waiver country such as China be able to buy one of these tickets today, apply for a visa, and attend the game here in New Zealand, or will our immigration system just not let them?

Hon ANDREW LITTLE: What I am confident that FIFA knows and understands is that they deal with Sovereign countries and the systems that those Sovereign countries run in the interests of that Sovereign country and, indeed, in their national security interests. That’s why they give warnings to fans, if they have to travel and require a visa, to give themselves an appropriate amount of time to do it. In the end, the release and allocation of tickets is a matter for FIFA, an international private body, and does not override the Sovereign obligations and requirements of a country like Aotearoa New Zealand.

Dr James McDowall: Supplementary?

SPEAKER: You’ve run out of supplementaries.

Question No. 5—Women

5. to the Minister for Women: How will Budget 2023 deliver for women?

Budget 2023 signals the Government’s ongoing commitment to creating a fairer, safer, and more equitable future for women and girls. Our Government is committed to improving outcomes for everyone, but this Budget will create a real positive difference for the lives and wellbeing of women and girls and their whānau. Investment—into such areas as childcare assistance, KiwiSaver, training and employment pathways, and family violence—provides women and their whānau with more targeted support and more opportunities to thrive and get ahead.

Sarah Pallett: How will Budget 2023 help women with the cost of living?

Hon JAN TINETTI: This Budget helps ease the cost of living pressures by significantly reducing the cost of early childhood education (ECE) for parents by extending 20 hours free ECE to two-year-olds. We are removing barriers to early learning and to allow parents to return to work or take on more hours if they can. We’re also investing $35.2 million into childcare assistance to expand eligibility, duration, and improve access for families. These investments increase eligibility and will help approximately 30,000 women currently accessing childcare assistance.

Sarah Pallett: How will Budget 2023 support the long-term economic outcomes for women?

Hon JAN TINETTI: We are continuing the Training Incentive Allowance in Budget 2023, with $80.1 million over four years to support sole parents, disabled people, and their carers to study towards higher-level qualifications. Since 2021, 90 percent of those who received this allowance were women. Supporting women into higher education and higher-paid employment helps to reduce gender pay gaps and creates intergenerational benefits. A $19.7 million investment into KiwiSaver will mean the Government can match employer contributions to paid parental leave recipients. This helps parents, particularly women, save for their retirement on a more equitable level and recognises the unpaid nature of childcare.

Sarah Pallett: How was gender budgeting utilised in Budget 2023?

Hon JAN TINETTI: To support the Budget process and improve outcomes for women and whānau, we’ve introduced gender budgeting, a powerful tool to help understand how Government spending and initiatives will impact people differently depending on their gender. Manatū Wāhine—Ministry for Women and the Treasury have led two gender-budgeting exercises to support public sector agencies to analyse how their initiatives will impact women and girls, with a particular focus on wāhine and kōtiro Māori. The exercise was expanded to including 15 public sector agencies for Budget 2023.

Question No. 6—Social Development and Employment

6. to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: How many more people are on the jobseeker benefit today compared to September 2017, and how much higher are jobseeker benefit numbers expected to climb, according to Treasury’s forecast from the Budget?

In September 2017, there were 64,299 people receiving a jobseeker work-ready benefit, and 56,427 receiving a jobseeker health and disability benefit. As at the end of last week, which are the most recent numbers that we have, there were 98,262 people receiving a jobseeker work-ready benefit, and 71,220 people receiving a jobseeker health and disability benefit. In Budget 2023, Treasury forecast jobseeker numbers to 200,600 by January 2025, decreasing to 179,200 by June 2027; this is due to challenging global conditions affecting our economy. However, at the beginning of the global pandemic, Treasury predicted main benefit numbers would rise to 487,500. Because of our quick actions as a Government, the number of people receiving a main benefit never went above 400,000. We have come through the pandemic in better shape than Treasury predicted, and while the global environment remains challenging, we are still much better placed than we were following the global financial crisis.

Hon Louise Upston: With 50,000 more on the jobseeker benefit today, can she explain how her Government has failed to bring jobseeker numbers down anywhere close to where they sat under the previous Government despite businesses up and down the country crying out for staff over the last couple of years?

Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: I think it’s really important that we keep this in perspective. As at March 2023, three years after the beginning of the global pandemic, 11 percent of New Zealand’s working-age population was receiving a main benefit. The comparison: in March, three years after the global financial crisis, 12.3 percent of the working-age population was receiving a main benefit. So we are still better placed. Compared to 2017—the same period—we are still seeing more exits off benefit into employment: in the 12 months ending March 2017, there were 58,785 exits; in the 12 months ending March 2023, there were 75,033 exits off benefit into work. We are prioritising this and always have. We want to support New Zealanders to get into the upskilling and training opportunities and to get into employment, and we’re seeing that focus actually work.

Hon Louise Upston: Does she agree that, with the economy now in recession and unemployment forecast to increase, her Government has completely and utterly wasted a golden opportunity to reduce benefit dependency and support people off welfare into work?

Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: No.

Ricardo Menéndez March: Does she believe that any family depending on someone receiving a jobseeker benefit should live in poverty, and if not, when will she lift incomes so that no one in Aotearoa is living in poverty?

Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: We are focused on reducing poverty, particularly for our children—but, of course, the wider impact is for the whole family. We see 77,000 fewer children in poverty now because of the actions that we have taken to address income adequacy. That includes consistently lifting the minimum wage. That includes significantly lifting benefits. That includes things like getting rid of two ridiculous and unnecessary sanctions that were having an impact on children. There is more to do, and we’re absolutely committed to doing that mahi.

Hon Louise Upston: Will it be easier or harder to reduce the number of people on the jobseeker benefit now that New Zealand is in a recession, and if harder, how many more children will be in benefit-dependent homes?

Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: What makes it easier for getting people into employment is actually investing in the upskilling and training programmes that support them to take up the jobs that are available. We have made record investments in that space, including with Mana in Mahi, Flexi-wage, and the thousands of people that have taken up the Apprenticeship Boost opportunity. Those are only a few examples, but that’s what makes it easier to support New Zealanders into work.

Hon Louise Upston: If the programmes the Minister has just talked about are so successful, why are there 50,000 more New Zealanders on a jobseeker benefit, and why has she cut funding to all of those employment initiatives in Budget 2023?

Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: As I said earlier, if we look at the raw figures, it doesn’t tell the story in the same way as looking at the proportion of working-age New Zealanders that are on benefit. In March of this year, that was 11 percent of the working-age population. Three years after the global financial crisis, it was 12.1 percent. We are better placed than we were then. There is still much more work to do, and we are committed to doing that work.

Question No. 7—Tourism

7. to the Minister of Tourism: What recent announcement has been made regarding the tourism industry’s transformation to be more environmentally responsible?

Last week, the draft Tourism Environment Action Plan went out for public consultation. The draft plan is the second pillar of the Tourism Industry Transformation Plan. The draft plan sets out actions to further shift the tourism industry to a regenerative model that gives back more than it takes. We have a critical window of opportunity to create and courageously unite behind a new vision for tourism in Aotearoa, something the sector is giving great feedback on. If we are going to contribute to global efforts to create a balanced and sustainable climate, we must act now.

Tāmati Coffey: Why is it important for the tourism sector to move to a regenerative model?

Hon PEENI HENARE: Tourism touches every part of the motu and has a major influence on New Zealand’s brand. Consumer awareness of environmental issues is increasing and the Government is listening. This plan was created in partnership with the sector, iwi, unions, and environmental organisations. It is important that we continue to preserve our natural environment as one of our key attractions in a world-class destination. This plan shows that tourism can lead the way to ensuring that culture and nature are our best offerings.

Tāmati Coffey: Can the Minister tell us what the action plan is about?

Hon PEENI HENARE: The plan outlines six Tirohanga Hou for ensuring that tourism in Aotearoa New Zealand protects and restores the climate and environment. One of those Tirohanga Hou is the decarbonisation of tourism journeys. Last week, I announced that the Government would be co-funding, alongside Air New Zealand, two studies that will test the feasibility of establishing and operating a sustainable aviation fuel production facility in New Zealand. Stats New Zealand data shows that aviation contributes up to 60 percent of tourism’s total emissions, and these studies are the first step in the right direction.

Tāmati Coffey: What is he hearing from the sector?

Hon PEENI HENARE: The sector is aware of the gravity of this piece of work, with Tourism Industry Aotearoa Chief Executive Rebecca Ingram saying, “It’s important that the industry feeds into this draft plan, which will help us develop real, practical actions to protect and improve our environment at this critical time”—

Chris Bishop: Just make a plan. All we need’s another strategy—that’ll sort everything out.

Hon PEENI HENARE: On the aviation fuel studies—Mr Bishop—Air New Zealand Chief Sustainability Officer Kiri Hannifin said, “Sustainable aviation fuel [was] in very high demand but limited supply. Commercially producing it … locally will not only help lower the country’s emissions and create jobs, but also provide fuel security in New Zealand”. This Government is taking transformational steps and Mr Bishop can pine all he wants, but that side did absolutely nothing. Kore. Zero.

Question No. 8—Health

8. to the Minister of Health: Is it correct that reported waiting times for children seeking mental health treatment in the Wellington region increased from 28 days in 2018 to almost 70 days in 2022, and does she agree with the Mental Health and Wellbeing Commission’s statement that “There are persistent workforce shortages, and we are yet to see a clear strategy and roadmap to grow and develop the workforce we so desperately need”?

Firstly, I want to acknowledge the impact waiting for mental health treatment has on young people and their families. Wait times are longer than I would like due to a range of factors, including increased demand for services and workforce shortages. In answer to the first part of the question, in relation to specialist services, yes. In answer to the second part of the question, the mental health workforce as a whole has grown substantially under this Government due to the introduction of the Access and Choice programme. I am advised that the child and adolescent mental health services in the former Capital and Coast district have recently succeeded in filling some of their vacancies. There are currently lower vacancies when compared to last year. I disagree there is a lack of a plan.

Matt Doocey: Why does the Minister use the excuse of the Access and Choice programme when a large majority of their workforce does not necessarily have a qualification, when the increasing vacancy rate is actually in the specialist workforce of psychiatry—just to give the Minister one example, last year psychiatry increased 125 percent in vacancy rates—psychologists, and nursing?

Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: Because there is overlap in the skilled professionals who work between hospital or specialists—

Matt Doocey: No psychiatrists work in the Access and Choice programme.

Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: That is correct. Psychiatrists don’t, but other mental health professionals with qualifications work both in specialist and in the primary Access and Choice system, and there has been a movement of trained workforce from the specialist and hospital-based services to the community services that we have set up. It is not an excuse, and we have a number of measures under way in order to grow the workforce. This includes promoting new entry to specialist practice changes for nurses, with 127 additional places; further training for nurse practitioner programmes, with 80 places; funding for additional clinical psychology internships, with 26 additional places; four new psychology training hubs; entry to specialist practice for social workers being supported with 42 additional practices; further work to attract people to psychiatry with the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists; and 70 additional bursaries for young people who are interested in training and mental health careers who are Māori, 65 for Pacific, and 11 for Muslim people.

Matt Doocey: In light of that answer of so-called announced initiatives, what is her response to 14 of the 16 regional health authority risk registers identifying workforce problems including understaffing as a major risk, with one risk register stating, “The pressure on mental health services treating children and teenagers increases the risk of an increased number of attempted and completed suicides.”?

Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: I’m aware of the risk posed by these vacancies and that is why we are taking action on multiple fronts to address them. Some of the specialist skills cannot be developed overnight and we do have to invest in our training programmes to get there. We are doing that work. I’ll also note that, over the pandemic, we have seen here and around the world an increase in the mental distress expressed by young people, and there is no health system in the world that would have already had a specialist trained workforce in order to meet those needs.

Matt Doocey: In light of the Minister’s answers of addressing the workforce crisis on multiple fronts, what responsibility does she take in light of Dougal Sutherland’s comments today, a clinical psychologist at Victoria University, who said, “The government’s singular focus on one or two new mental health initiatives has been at the expense of training programmes.”?

Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: I am very happy to engage with anyone from the sector on how we might improve our training programmes. I am not aware of Dr or Mr Sutherland’s background, but we have work under way with the college of psychiatrists to make sure that there are further psychiatrists trained, including in the area of youth and adolescent mental health.

Matt Doocey: Why, then, had no money been spent of the Budget 2022 announcement of $18.7 million for child and adolescent specialist mental health by 31 March of this year?

Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: I am advised that that money will begin being spent in the coming month.

Question No. 9—Foreign Affairs

9. to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: What recent announcements has she made in response to Iran’s ongoing human rights abuses?

Thank you for the question. Recently, we have announced an extension to travel bans on individuals responsible for the Iranian Government’s violent response to protests, particularly in the wake of Mahsa Amini’s death in police custody last year. This extension of the travel ban increases the number of banned individuals from 37 to 55, covering more senior Iranian officials involved in human rights violations and the violent suppression of protests. We have taken these steps to condemn the continued harsh repression of peaceful demonstrators and the severe human rights abuses in Iran, including the unjust execution of individuals and the strict enforcement of the Islamic dress code on Iranian women and girls. We stand with likeminded international partners in expressing our deep concern over these actions.

Ibrahim Omer: What criteria have been used to identify the individuals to whom the travel ban has been extended?

Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: The individuals selected for the travel ban are predominantly those who have played significant roles in the egregious human rights abuses in Iran. These include high-ranking Iranian officials involved in the violent suppression of the protests, members of the Iranian judiciary responsible for issuing death sentences in unfair trials, and members of both the law enforcement command and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). By extending the travel bans, we are sending a clear message that these gross human rights violations will not be tolerated and that those responsible will face serious international consequences.

Ibrahim Omer: What additional measures are under consideration to further pressure the Iranian Government, particularly with regard to its execution of death penalties and the imposition of strict Islamic dress codes on women and girls?

Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: We are continuously reviewing and assessing our stance and actions regarding the human rights situation in Iran. As I’ve mentioned, additional individuals and measures remain under consideration. These measures could include further diplomatic actions. We are also working closely with our international partners to coordinate a unified response to the situation. The enforcement of the Islamic dress code on women and girls is indeed concerning, and we’re exploring ways to exert pressure on Iran to respect the rights and freedoms of all its citizens.

Golriz Ghahraman: Has the Minister spoken with Prime Minister Hipkins since he became Prime Minister about exercising his discretion to designate the Islamic Revolutionary Guard, or morality police, a terrorist entity, pursuant to existing legislation, which would allow not only travel bans but, importantly, the freezing of assets and banning of funding mechanisms of most individuals who are responsible for terrorising Iranians?

Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: The position of the Government remains the same, but, in light of the particular question regarding the conversation, no, that has not taken place. New Zealand has not designated the IRGC as a terrorist entity, as the IRGC is still considered unlikely to meet the definition of a terrorist entity, including because it’s not clear that it would meet the Act’s definition of an entity. The Terrorism Suppression Act was never intended as a means to respond to human rights violations. Aotearoa New Zealand has other measures against the IRGC, and these include travel bans, sanctions under our Russia Sanctions Act specifically for their role in supporting the illegal invasion of Ukraine, and other UN-mandated sanctions of the IRGC role in nuclear proliferation activities.

Ibrahim Omer: With the recent extension of the travel ban, how does New Zealand plan to ensure the effectiveness of these measures, and what actions will New Zealand take if Iran continues to resist this course?

Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: New Zealand is committed to upholding human rights and freedom as a nation. We are continuously monitoring the situation in Iran and are prepared to adapt our approach and escalate our actions as necessary. While a part of our response, these travel bans are by no means the limit of our actions. If Iran continues to ignore these calls for respecting human rights, we are prepared to consider more severe measures in coordination with our international partners. Our goal is clear: the Iranian Government must cease its human rights violations, and we will continue to apply pressure until this goal is achieved.

Question No. 10—Education

10. to the Minister of Education: What is the unaudited draft financial surplus or deficit for Te Pūkenga for the financial year ended 31 December 2022?

As projected, the deficit is both unaudited and draft; it is subject to change while the auditing process is under way. As at 16 May 2023, when I wrote my letter of expectation to the chair of the Te Pūkenga board, the draft deficit was $86 million for 2022. That letter is publicly available. Audit New Zealand and Te Pūkenga are working towards completing the auditing process by the end of this month, and I will receive the final figure after that.

Penny Simmonds: So is the Minister saying that, against a budgeted deficit of around $68 million, the actual Te Pūkenga deficit for 2022 is likely to be $86 million—half as much again?

Hon JAN TINETTI: As I said in the primary answer, the projected deficit is both unaudited and draft, and it is subject to change while the auditing process is under way.

Penny Simmonds: What specific factual evidence supports the Minister in select committee yesterday stating, regarding Te Pūkenga, “We have something that is developing really, really well, and I feel a lot more comfort.”?

Hon JAN TINETTI: As the Minister responsible for a Crown entity, I have set my expectations to the board very clearly. In the next 12 months, I have outlined three urgent strategic priorities, which I expect Te Pūkenga to focus and deliver on: (1) delivering quality education and training for all learners; (2) developing a plan towards financial sustainability, including a viable operating model; (3) strong leadership and governance. I have confidence that Te Pūkenga has the leadership and tools to realise the benefits for the new model for students, staff, industry, and communities. But rest assured, I’ll be monitoring this progress very, very carefully.

Penny Simmonds: Does the Minister consider that Te Pūkenga, the Government’s mega-merged polytechnic, with a draft deficit of $80 million, failing to meet its financial statutory obligations, failing to meet its unification of programmes target, failing to present a sustainable operating model, failing to be responsive to regional needs, falling student enrolments, and hundreds of redundancies signals an entity in serious trouble?

SPEAKER: The Minister can answer any part of that—or not answer it, if she doesn’t want to.

Hon JAN TINETTI: I’ve been very clear that the progress in the last three years has been slower than anticipated. But what we aren’t doing here is running a “bums on seats” model. What we do want is a high-quality education that is responsive to market conditions and sector needs. Would I like it to be faster? Yes, of course. But I understand that the level of transformation that we’re talking about takes time, and it must be done well.

Hon Grant Robertson: Can the Minister confirm that, in 2018 when the Government came into office, 80 percent of New Zealand’s polytechnics were facing losses on current trends, that a Cabinet paper was required to bail out Tai Poutini Polytech to the tune of $33 million, and that was followed by another bailout for Unitec in the margin of around a hundred million dollars?

Hon JAN TINETTI: Absolutely I can. That is why this Government wasn’t prepared to put their head in the sand and do nothing about it. We wanted to take action, we did take action, and we are starting to see that now turn around.

Penny Simmonds: At what point will the Minister accept that Te Pūkenga, the Government’s mega-merged polytechnic, has reached such a precarious state that she must intervene and disestablish Te Pūkenga?

Hon JAN TINETTI: Change is always hard, and in particular during times of economic challenges. Overall, the progress has been slower than anticipated over the past three years. However, Te Pūkenga has now transitioned all former institutes of technology and polytechnic subsidiaries and the arranging training function from nine transitional industry training organisations into Te Pūkenga. I have confidence that Te Pūkenga has the leadership and tools to realise the benefits of the new model for students, staff, industries, and communities, and we will be watching this very carefully.

Hon Michael Woodhouse: Point of order. Thank you, Mr Speaker. In your review of oral questions, I wonder if you would reflect on whether Mr Robertson’s supplementary question recently met the terms of Speakers’ rulings 183/7 and 191/2, and, if they did, whether there’s going to be a sort of a further Speaker’s ruling in that regard.

SPEAKER: I will do. I will point out that I will look at the whole question and all of the supplementaries and make a judgment on—as I have sat here in real time doing that, I can point out the number of legs in the supplementaries; the assertions, imputations. I’m taking all of that into consideration, and not interrupting another question in the same vein. But I will go back and have a look.

Hon Michael Woodhouse: Speaking to that point, and accepting it entirely, the House, I think, supports the interpretations of Standing Orders 390 and 396 as it relates to the number of legs; no question. This was different.

Hon Grant Robertson: Speaking to that point of order, Mr Speaker.

SPEAKER: You may speak to it—I’m not going to change my ruling, though.

Hon Grant Robertson: No, no, Mr Speaker; I just wanted to make the point that Standing Order 390 obviously includes a great deal more than just a matter of legs of a question. It includes imputations, inferences, etc., which is what the Speaker ruled about, and that has been a consistent feature of virtually every Opposition question today.

Question No. 11—Commerce and Consumer Affairs

11. to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs: What progress has the Government made for Kiwi consumers this week?

A lot. This week, we have made three big steps for consumers. First, I have initiated a Commerce Commission study into retail banking to ensure Kiwis can have faith in banking services and that bank profits are appropriate and justified. Secondly, the Grocery Industry Competition Bill passed through the House last night. The bill advances the interests of Kiwis at the checkout, and it supports local suppliers in the face of a supermarket duopoly that has been making profits well over the odds for years. Thirdly, today, we take a big stride in consumer choice as we publish a draft bill on consumer data rights. This framework will ultimately allow people to shop around for goods and services, including banking, at the touch of a button. It’s been a big week for New Zealand consumers. I am incredibly proud of the progress that this Government is making.

Terisa Ngobi: How have you prioritised your efforts?

Hon Dr DUNCAN WEBB: On this side of the House, we prioritise making the most difference for the many, not the few, and in particular for those that need it most. That’s why we focused on things like fuel, groceries, building supplies, and now personal banking services. We found market studies to be a powerful tool to get to the bottom of competition issues, and that’s why we’ve asked the Commerce Commission to shine its spotlight on markets that have the greatest effect on the most people.

Terisa Ngobi: What are some signs of progress?

Hon Dr DUNCAN WEBB: There are lots of signs of progress. The green shoots of competition are visible, and major legislation only passed yesterday. Over 140 pieces of prime land have had their anti-competitive arrangements removed by the supermarket duopoly. Two major supermarket chains have announced they’ve set up wholesale business units, international supermarkets are entering the country, new online Kiwi grocery retailers are growing fast, other retail chains are expanding into groceries, and there are new price innovations like a winter grocery price freeze. This Government addresses long-term problems in a bold and meaningful way, not one that looks for quick political wins—and this makes all the difference.

Terisa Ngobi: What else is the Government doing for consumers?

Hon Dr DUNCAN WEBB: Oh, but wait, there’s more—and this one’s for free: this week, we made progress on the consumer data right to help Kiwis compare and switch banks and other services at the touch of a button. The draft bill was released today, and we’re on track to introduce that legislation this year. The Government is well advanced on the code for supermarket suppliers and on a system of unit pricing for groceries and on the appointment of the new Grocery Commissioner. We are progressing on the issue of anti-competitive land agreements in the rest of the economy and ensuring an affordable pricing regime for water. This Government is doing everything it can to get New Zealand markets working. We’re the only ones who can be trusted to keep doing this come October this year.

Question No. 12—Children

12. to the Minister for Children: Does he stand by all of his statements and actions regarding Oranga Tamariki?

Let me start by saying any instance of allegations of harm at Oranga Tamariki residences is one too many. It’s disappointing and saddening and totally unacceptable. I requested the role of Minister for Children to make a difference to tamariki and to enable communities to make decisions about and for their own children. I stand by the fact that children do better with whānau and the work that is under way to make this happen. What has allegedly happened in Oranga Tamariki residences is incredibly disappointing and deeply concerning, and I know every party in Parliament feels the same on this. Every child deserves to feel safe and secure in these residences, which is why I agree with the decisions announced yesterday.

Harete Hipango: Who informed the Minister on Wednesday, 8 June about the sexual abuse allegations at an Oranga Tamariki youth justice residence?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: I can take the House through the time line of events if they wish. I was first informed of an incident at one of the care and protection residences on 8 June. I was advised that it was an isolated incident and that the staff had been removed from the residence. Police were immediately notified and there is an active investigation under way. I made it clear that this was unacceptable and that Oranga Tamariki needed to do better. So that was on 8 June. I think my adviser was the person that told me after she’d been contacted by Oranga Tamariki’s chief executive.

Harete Hipango: Why did the Minister for Children not immediately inform his chief executive of Oranga Tamariki of the sexual abuse allegation on 8 June, or within 24 hours of the Minister being notified?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: It was the chief executive that informed my office—i.e., my adviser—who immediately informed me.

Harete Hipango: How could that be when the chief executive of Oranga Tamariki in a media release dated Wednesday, 21 June—yesterday—said, and I quote, “Over the past week”—which is Wednesday, 14 June to Wednesday, 21 June—“I have been informed of two serious allegations involving staff acting inappropriately towards young people at Oranga Tamariki.”, when the Minister has disclosed to this House that he was notified on 8 June?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: I think the member is confused. On 8 June, I was notified about the first issue. Last Friday, I was advised of the second issue at a separate residence. On Sunday, I met with Oranga Tamariki, where we discussed the situation and made the decision that there needed to be a review.

Harete Hipango: Why, when there were children clearly at risk, did the Minister fail to act on 8 June and fail to notify his chief executive at the earliest for immediate action to be taken to either remove the children from the place of alleged abuse or remove the alleged abusers from the youth justice residence?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: The chief executive of Oranga Tamariki informed my office on 8 June. At the same time, he informed us that the alleged perpetrator had been stood down and that the child protection protocols had been put in place. So Oranga Tamariki found out and acted immediately to address the situation.

Dr Elizabeth Kerekere: Tēnā koe e te Māngai o te Whare. When the Minister said in the House yesterday that the decision to appoint Mike Bush was the right one, why did he think a former Police Commissioner was a suitable person to conduct an independent rapid assessment, as opposed to the Children’s Commissioner, whom the children felt safe enough to open up to?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: The former commissioner, Mike Bush, has all the skills necessary to investigate what went on and to make the necessary changes.

Dr Elizabeth Kerekere: What does the Minister say to survivors of State care abuse and long-time advocates, such as Paora Moyle, who called for all residences they refer to as “children’s prisons” to be shut down in 2015, 2021, and today?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: So there are two types of residences: a youth justice residence is where children and young people who have committed crimes go to; then there are care and protection residences, which Oranga Tamariki is in a process of transferring out of. There are seven five-bedroom community-based residences planned to be built, but this all takes time—not just to build the residences but also the model of care that’s needed, which will be different. So it just takes time; I’d like it to happen sooner rather than later, but it is starting to happen.

Jan Logie: Does he agree with the Children’s Commissioner that residences are “not fit for purpose and they need to be closed down”, and instead we should have “smaller, home-style remand centres or places in the community” and, if so—to what he’s discussed just earlier—when will we see that happen?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: I do agree with the Children’s Commissioner, which is what I just said in the answer to Dr Kerekere. In terms of the when—like I said, I would like it to be sooner rather than later, but it is something that Oranga Tamariki is working on.

Harete Hipango: Supplementary.

SPEAKER: Sorry, there are no more supplementaries—well, there are in the room, if other members want them? No? OK, very well. That concludes oral questions.