Oral Questions

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

Thank you for the question. The resilience of the economy has been reflected in the Crown accounts. For the seven months to the end of January, the operating balance before gains and losses (OBEGAL) recorded a deficit of $2.4 billion. This was close to the forecast at December’s Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update and $5.6 billion lower than for the same period a year ago. The Government’s sound management of our finances shows that we are well placed to respond to the cost of living pressures and the impact of Cyclone Gabrielle and the flooding in January.

Shanan Halbert: What else did the report say about the impact of the economy on the Government’s books?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Core Crown tax revenue was $430 million, or 0.7 percent, below forecast, at $64.7 billion. This was mainly due to lower-than-forecast GST returns. Core Crown expenses were $164 million, or 0.2 percent, below forecasts, at $71.7 billion.

Shanan Halbert: What did the report say about the Government’s debt position and its impact on the economy?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Net debt stood at 18.9 percent of GDP, below the forecast of 19.8 percent of GDP, mainly due to market conditions affecting the financial portfolio of entities such as the New Zealand Superannuation Fund. Our debt levels are among the lowest in the OECD and well below the Government’s debt ceiling of 30 percent of GDP. This ensures we are well positioned to handle the impacts of Cyclone Gabrielle and future economic shocks.

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

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The International Monetary Fund’s World Economic Outlook updates projects that global growth will slow from 3.4 percent in 2022 to 2.9 percent in 2023 and 3.1 percent in 2024. These are well below the historic averages for global growth. New Zealand is well positioned to face these global challenges and the recent extreme weather events with a solid balance sheet, near-record low unemployment, growing exports, rising tourist numbers, and an increasing number of overseas workers arriving to fill vacancies. The Government will continue to take a balanced and responsible approach in managing our finances.

Question No. 2—Building and Construction

2. to the Minister for Building and Construction: Does she expect that building and construction costs will continue to increase this year beyond the 10.4 percent seen in 2022, and does she expect the supply of building and construction materials will be able to meet the demand for new buildings and repairs following recent extreme weather events?

on behalf of the Minister for Building and Construction: It’s well known that there have been cost increases over the past couple of years due to supply chain constraints relating largely to COVID. While it is too early to speculate on the impact recent extreme weather events will have on prices and supply of materials, I continue to monitor the situation closely. Since January, we’ve been engaging with the sector to assess supply chain constraints following extreme weather events, to identify where there may be blockages and what needs to be done. My officials continue to engage with the Construction Sector Accord, building merchants, and the Critical Materials Taskforce to ensure we’re responding to any immediate material shortages. I’m also a member of the newly established Cabinet Extreme Weather Recovery Committee, which has been set up to coordinate and direct the Government’s response to recent weather events.

Brooke van Velden: Point of order, Mr Speaker. It wasn’t clear that the question was addressed about whether the Minister expected that the costs would increase. We heard about costs due to COVID, but not whether they’ll increase this year.

Hon ANDREW LITTLE: Speaking to the point of order, my answer said, while it is too early to speculate on the impact recent extreme weather events will have, I continue to monitor the situation closely.

Brooke van Velden: Is she concerned that some building merchants have already contacted their clients noting supplier price increases of up to 10.5 percent for Pink Batts, 16.5 percent for cement board, and 16 percent for framing connectors and brackets by the end of April this year?

Hon ANDREW LITTLE: On behalf of the Minister, the advice I’ve had from officials is they have not yet seen any material price increases as a result of the extreme weather events, and they keep the matter under close monitoring.

Brooke van Velden: Why is the Government progressing with new H1 building standards, which will add an estimated $15,000 of additional costs on to a new residential build when a report from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment on the new standards noted that “consumers are already under financial pressure in light of cost of living increases”?

Hon ANDREW LITTLE: On behalf of the Minister, our country’s history is littered with times when we relaxed standards or abandoned standards altogether, and the consequence of that in the building sector was low-quality buildings. We don’t intend to repeat that.

Brooke van Velden: Has the Critical Materials Taskforce identified any equivalent materials that could be made available in New Zealand to mitigate any artificial shortages in the wake of Cyclone Gabrielle, excluding plaster board?

Hon ANDREW LITTLE: On behalf of the Minister, the role of the Critical Materials Taskforce is to monitor the availability of materials to support our construction activity, both in relation to responding to the extreme weather events we’ve had recently and just to continue the programme of work that this Government has promoted and encouraged to increase housing supply. They don’t deal in particular policy areas; that is a matter for the relevant ministry, and they keep abreast of what the sector needs from time to time.

Question No. 3—Health

3. to the Minister of Health: What recent announcement has she made regarding pay increases for nurses?

Yesterday, I announced a historic $540 million bump in pay for nurses. Backdated interim payments have now been completed across the Auckland region, and nurses throughout the country have received a much deserved increase. Although how much extra each nurse has received depends on their current rates, the increases range from 4.5 percent to 17 percent, but a large proportion of registered nurses are receiving an increase in base pay of around $12,000. This Government backs our nurses and has delivered a significant pay increase for them.

Dr Tracey McLellan: What does this mean for a nurse just starting out in the profession, and how has that changed since 2017?

Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: Newly qualified nurses in 2017 started work on $49,449 a year before overtime and allowances. This figure is now $66,570 a year. That is a considerable increase for our workforce, overwhelmingly female, that has traditionally been undervalued.

Dr Tracey McLellan: What does the payment mean for nurses represented by the New Zealand Nurses Organisation?

Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: Although further litigation has arisen, it was sensible that the Employment Relations Authority allowed Te Whatu Ora the ability to make interim pay equity payments while still awaiting a final result. This means nurses are able to have that money in their pockets now. I continue to urge parties to resolve the outstanding issues.

Dr Tracey McLellan: How do these interim payments deliver on the Government’s commitment to pay equity?

Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: What this payment does is ensure that nurses are getting more money in their pockets while they are feeling the pinch of the cost of living. While there is still more work to do in negotiating further on pay equity, this is an important step in showing our Government’s commitment to valuing nurses and paying a female-dominated workforce what they’re worth.

Question No. 4—Finance

4. to the Minister of Finance: When does he anticipate the economic conditions will be right for the introduction of an income insurance scheme, and what ongoing work, if any, is being done to develop such a scheme?

To the member’s first question, we’ve been clear that there is a gap in looking after New Zealanders who lose their job through no fault of their own, but we would need to see a significant improvement in economic conditions before it is further advanced. While it’s not possible to put a date to that, we would need to see several matters resolved or improved, including a return to surplus and cost of living pressures significantly eased. To the second question, we have already announced that the New Zealand income insurance scheme will not proceed in its current form and that we have delayed the planned legislation and wound down implementation activity. As the Prime Minister indicated at the time of the announcement of this, there would be ongoing policy work to explore the best ways to address inequities in the long term.

Nicola Willis: How many people are still employed either directly or via consultancies or contractors to work on the matters just raised by the Minister?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: That work is being undertaken at the moment. I’m advised, and, indeed, written questions and answers have advised members of the Opposition, that the agencies expect that a considerable proportion of the funding that has been set aside will be returned but that a small team will continue this work.

Nicola Willis: Point of order, Mr Speaker. My question was quite precise in asking for a number and there was no address of the request for a number.

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Speaking to the point of order, that wasn’t the question that was put on notice, and I think the member will be well aware that matters relating to staffing within ACC would probably be best addressed to the Minister for ACC.

SPEAKER: Well, I’ll make a ruling on the point of order: the question was addressed.

Nicola Willis: Can he confirm that the Government’s recent Cabinet paper on income insurance concluded that such schemes can increase unemployment, and, if so, will he keep pursuing this policy even if he is told it will mean fewer Kiwis in work?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: That is one of the criticisms of social insurance schemes around the world. The actual facts of the matter don’t tend to bear that out around the world. What I can guarantee for the member is that, at this time, the implementation of an income insurance scheme has been paused, but there is ongoing work to see how we can fill the gap in our social security scheme that she seems to care so little about.

Nicola Willis: If the work, as he has claimed, has been paused, why is it that there are still people working on it being paid for by New Zealand taxpayers?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As I noted, the pausing is about the legislation and the implementation of the scheme. It seems that the member is struggling a little bit on the difference between something being cancelled and something being paused, so I’ll try and put it in terms that she will understand. Her leadership ambitions have not been cancelled; they’ve just been paused.

Nicola Willis: Can he confirm that the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment concluded that a proposed income insurance scheme would place additional financial stress on some families, especially but not only on low-income families, meaning that many low-income workers would struggle to meet the cost of the proposed new levy; and why, with that advice, is it just on pause and hasn’t been killed?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Again, it is the job of Government agencies to provide the pros and cons of any given policy. In terms of the way in which the Government views this, New Zealanders who lose their job through no fault of their own—sometimes because they might have got cancer or sometimes because they’ve been made redundant—deserve at least the consideration that a Government might think about how we can support them. Now is not the right time to do that because of the economic conditions that we are in, and that is the reason why the implementation of the scheme has been paused.

Nicola Willis: Can he confirm that he was also advised that his proposed scheme would impose massive costs on New Zealand small business, with the extra tax costing a typical small business $13,617 more a year; and what is it that makes him think there will ever be a time when New Zealand small businesses will welcome that cost?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: In answer to the latter part of that question, the member might want to recall that this proposal in fact came forward to the Government from Business New Zealand and the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions in a joint approach to the Government. That is because, among other things, social insurance schemes around the world, including the one that we had been working on, are designed to support the ability of businesses to find workers—workers who can be retrained, workers who can quickly move from one business to another. The Business New Zealand organisation might like to answer the question for the member about how they feel about that. We understand that there’s a variety of needs for small businesses—one of them is access to staff.

Nicola Willis: Why is the Government keeping this fatally flawed policy in zombie mode, when no matter the economic conditions, he knows it will drive up unemployment, cost a fortune, and take yet more hard-earned money away from working Kiwis?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Apart from all the various assertions that were included in that question, the member might want to reflect on the number of countries around the world who have social insurance schemes. In fact, within the OECD there’s only a very small handful of countries who don’t have some form of social insurance scheme. We continue to believe that there are gaps in our social security framework, and we will continue to look for ways that we can fill those when economic conditions are right. When it comes to the member’s concern for low and middle income families that she’s discovered today, I would invite her to reflect on her failure to support lifts to the minimum wage, and her failure to support increases in benefits, increases in the family tax credit, and increases to the Best Start payment—all of the initiatives proposed by this Government which help low and middle income families, which the National Party oppose.

Nicola Willis: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek leave to table a series of documents. I’ve checked—they’re not publicly available; they’ve only been released to National under the Official Information Act. They include verification of claims I’ve made in the House, including, also, that the proposed unemployment insurance scheme would also place additional burdens on the health system, likely causing longer wait times for GPs and operations.

SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection to that? There is none. It may be tabled.

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

Question No. 5—Foreign Affairs

5. to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: What support has the Government given to Vanuatu following Cyclone Judy and Cyclone Kevin?

In response to requests from Vanuatu, we deployed a C-130 aircraft on Sunday, carrying relief supplies and a team of seven personnel from the New Zealand Defence Force, Fire and Emergency New Zealand, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, to help with damage assessments and inform a necessary response. The second C-130 flight left Whenuapai on Tuesday with further urgently needed relief supplies in the form of shelter tool kits, mother and infant kits, family hygiene kits, and agricultural kits. A third flight is due to leave today. In addition to relief supplies, it will also carry personnel and communications equipment from the New Zealand Red Cross. New Zealand has also made available $150,000 to rapidly support Vanuatu’s response, and that will be delivered through the New Zealand High Commission in Port Vila. We are also supporting NGO partner Adventist Development and Relief Agency to release humanitarian supplies that have been funded by our Government to the value of $340,000. We’re working closely with the Government of Vanuatu and our FRANZ humanitarian partners—Australia and France—to coordinate support. Any New Zealand assistance will not draw resources away from the Government’s domestic response efforts to Cyclone Gabrielle.

Dan Rosewarne: What information will Aotearoa New Zealand consider to assess its next contribution?

Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: We’ll consider the needs assessment based on aerial and on-the-ground assessments of the personnel that we have sent alongside Australia and France, and then we will consider the requests of the Government of Vanuatu, coordinate our efforts with Australia and France, and then respond accordingly.

Dan Rosewarne: What coordination is currently in place to ensure that relief efforts and a recovery response is not duplicated, as well as coordinated and aligned to other international partners?

Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: All relief activity is coordinated through the Vanuatu National Disaster Management Office (VNDMO). The New Zealand High Commission in Vanuatu has a longstanding relationship with the VNDMO. FRANZ partners are coordinating closely on the ground and between capitals. Daily calls and meetings ensure the most efficient use of military and civilian assets, appropriate provision of supplies, and close coordination with the Government of Vanuatu. The FRANZ partnership has operated for over 13 years, and we continue to coordinate our activities like that for Vanuatu.

Dan Rosewarne: Given the likelihood of more regular significant weather events and storms impacting on livelihoods in places such as Vanuatu and the Pacific, what steps is Aotearoa New Zealand taking to support the resilience of the Pacific?

Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: In October 2021, Aotearoa New Zealand announced its international climate finance commitment of $1.3 billion for the 2022-25 period. At least 50 percent of the commitment will support Pacific Island countries, and at least 50 percent will target adaptation and building resilience to the impacts of climate change. The International Climate Finance Strategy, Tuia te Waka a Kiwa, will guide the delivery of this commitment. Initiatives supported with this finance include early warning systems, disaster insurance, and efforts to improve water and food security in the face of climate change. New Zealand is supporting national disaster management officers and other first responders to strengthen their disaster preparedness and response capabilities.

Question No. 6—Health

6. to the Minister of Health: Are the current shorter stays in emergency department performance metrics published on the Health New Zealand website accurate, and what were the figures for Northland in November 2022?

This morning, I was made aware of incorrect data on the Te Whatu Ora website for November and December 2022. On receipt of this information, I called Te Whatu Ora officials into my office this morning for an explanation, where they advised me of a publication error in their data. Te Whatu Ora apologised to me for this mistake, with an assurance that the underlying data collection, collation, and assessment is robust, and that its pre-publication assurance processes will be strengthened. Officials have informed me that the updated report will be on their website tomorrow. In regards to the second part of the member’s question, I am advised that the current short stay emergency department performance metric in Northland District in November 2022 was 78.7.

Dr Shane Reti: Why, earlier this week, did she use inaccurate data to say that there was a large improvement in emergency department (ED) wait times in Northland when there was not; and had she even seen the data when she made that comment?

Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: I did not make that comment, and media have updated their reporting.

Dr Shane Reti: What is her response to Health New Zealand medical director Pete Watson, who stated earlier today that the figures were “as accurate as we’ve got them at the moment” but “clearly [are] not accurate”; and has every single performance measure, including cancer and surgical wait times, been removed from the Health New Zealand website today because of concerns that all of it is inaccurate?

Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: I am aware of those comments, and no. As I said in my primary answer, the issue with the short stay emergency department target is that there was an error in the publication of the data, and that the underlying data used by decision makers in the districts, at the national level, and by the board, was accurate.

Dr Shane Reti: Then why have all of the performance metrics been taken down?

Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: I have sought Te Whatu Ora to provide an assurance that their underlying quality-assurance processes are correct. They need to go through that process. They have assured me that they will have the updated shorter stay in emergency department figures available by the end of the day tomorrow.

Dr Shane Reti: Is she deliberately inflating the figures to obscure deteriorating ED wait times?

Hon Grant Robertson: Point of order, Mr Speaker. While I know you adopt a fairly flexible approach with questions, that is calling in to question the character of a member and is outside of the Standing Orders.

SPEAKER: Yeah, that’s not the best way to phrase it. One, a reasonable New Zealander would take that as meaning that the Minister’s making it up, so you might want to rephrase the question.

Hon Mark Mitchell: They already think that.

SPEAKER: Who said that? You did. You know what to do.

Hon Mark Mitchell: I withdraw and apologise.

Dr Shane Reti: Do you want me to rephrase the question?

SPEAKER: Yes.

Dr Shane Reti: Are the ED wait time figures being obscured to make them look better than they actually are?

Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: As I’ve said, there was a publication error and that the underlying data that has been available throughout to decision makers will be made available shortly, and Te Whatu Ora has apologised for that error. I have not at all tried to sugar-coat the situations in emergency departments. I have visited three departments since I came into this role. I’ve seen my former colleagues and the circumstances that they are working in, and I want them to know that the Government understands they are under pressure, and they were rightfully, quite reasonably, disappointed by the incorrect reporting of those statements.

Question No. 7—Emergency Management

7. to the Minister for Emergency Management: What announcement has he made on further support for the cyclone and flooding recovery?

Today, the Government announced a contribution of $15 million to help local councils remove rubbish from cyclone-affected areas. Local authorities need to make urgent rubbish collections from residential properties. We’ve heard from some that they don’t have the financial capacity to deal with the issue, given the scale, so it’s important we support them to take immediate action. I note from my regular conversations with affected councils that further support will be required, but this funding is a welcome relief to those communities that are heading towards recovery. Local councils are having to face unprecedented damage from the cyclone, so I’m glad that we’re able to contribute funds that will enable them to help their communities as fast as possible.

Naisi Chen: How will this support work?

Hon KIERAN McANULTY: This funding will provide immediate financial support to the councils for the rubbish collections caused by cyclone damage. Councils are best placed to determine priority based on the worst affected areas and those that pose a higher public health risk. The funding also covers transport and disposal. This support is provided as an addition to the council’s own waste management funding streams, as well as insurance and Earthquake Commission arrangements.

Naisi Chen: How will the Government support the affected communities to deal with silt?

Hon KIERAN McANULTY: We’ve announced a $55 million primary sector support package that will help farmers and growers remove silt, but we’ve also directed officials to urgently provide advice on a long-term plan for the silt clean-up. This plan has been based on the most up-to-date environmental science so that our efforts are effective.

Naisi Chen: What other announcements has the Government made to support cyclone recovery?

Hon KIERAN McANULTY: Today, the Minister for Social Development and the Associate Minister for Cyclone Recovery announced a $15 million reimbursement package for marae, iwi, and recognised rural and community groups. These groups have used their own resources to provide welfare support to people affected by the cyclone. There is existing provision in the emergency management system for this kind of support, but it can take time to distribute and normally doesn’t extend to the community groups who have stepped up in the wake of Cyclone Gabrielle. We’ve streamlined this process and made more groups eligible so that they can be appropriately reimbursed for essential support that they have provided people.

Question No. 8—Justice

8. to the Minister of Justice: Does she stand by all of her statements and actions?

on behalf of the Minister of Justice: Yes, in the context in which they were given and taken.

Hon Paul Goldsmith: How does she stand by her statement last October on TVNZ regarding hate speech: “I guarantee that I’ll be introducing a law that I intend to have concluded and put into law by the next election.”?

Hon DAVID PARKER: Well, that confirms that these matters must be taken within the context in which they are given. Of course, the Government has since said that all of those issues are now going to be considered by the Law Commission.

Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does she think it’s a good look for the country when guarantees given by its justice Minister aren’t worth anything and cannot be relied upon?

Hon DAVID PARKER: Oh, but that’s just not correct, as I have already explained.

Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does she agree with the Prime Minister that her proposed hate speech legislation “would have consumed the government’s time and energy at a time when it needed to focus” and that, in justice, the Government should be focused on combating the 33 percent increase in violent crime, the 500 percent increase in ram raids, and long delays to the courts?

Hon DAVID PARKER: I can confirm for the member that ram raids are down by two-thirds, which is very good news.

Hon Paul Goldsmith: Tell that to the people of Long Drive. Supplementary—

SPEAKER: Order!

Hon Paul Goldsmith: Why—

SPEAKER: Order! Was that your supplementary, that comment that you made, because really—you know, I think the member has been here long enough to know that you don’t start off a supplementary by giving a narrative on the previous answer; you ask a question. I’m just considering whether I should count that as the question. I think that, in this case, I’ll let you ask the question.

Hon Paul Goldsmith: Thank you, Mr Speaker. My supplementary question is: why, when the Government still hasn’t effectively addressed the 33 percent increase in violent crime, is her Government still devoting the Government’s time and energy to introducing legislation to lower the voting age to 16?

Hon DAVID PARKER: Well—as followers of the cricket might appreciate—in the style of Geoffrey Boycott and Mark Richardson, I can confirm that Cabinet has taken no such decision.

Question No. 9—Small Business

9. to the Minister for Small Business: What recent progress has been made on the roll-out of the Government’s fog cannon subsidy scheme for New Zealand small businesses?

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Last week, I visited the One Stop Shop convenience store in central Wellington to see a fog cannon installed and tested, after having received a voucher from the Government’s subsidy scheme. The scheme, which went live on 1 February of this year, has already seen over 500 applications approved across the country. I’m advised that 88 fog cannons have already been installed, with another 168 booked in for installation over the coming months. People deserve to feel safe in their workplace, and the Minister of Police and I are determined to make it as easy as possible for small businesses to take part in this scheme.

Jamie Strange: What is the criteria of the scheme, and how many small businesses are likely to receive support?

Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: To qualify for this scheme, the retail business’ main purpose must be to sell finished goods to the public, such as a dairy, bottle store, jeweller, clothes shop, or service station. Retailers will need to meet certain criteria to be eligible, including having no more than two outlets, five or fewer paid staff, and a street frontage. While it is difficult to accurately estimate the demand, for the rest of the financial year we are forecasting up to 1,500 vouchers being issued to small businesses around the country.

Jamie Strange: What has been the regional distribution of vouchers and installations to small businesses?

Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: Auckland and Christchurch have been in the majority of the approved applications to date, but there have been a regionally diverse range of installations, including 21 in Waikato, 13 in Auckland, 19 in Canterbury, four in Whanganui-Manawatū, seven in the Bay of Plenty, and 18 in Wellington.

Jamie Strange: Is it too late for small businesses to participate in the scheme; if not, how can they do so?

Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: Not at all. For small-business owners to participate in the scheme—not at all. It takes approximately 15 minutes to complete an online application, and if the applicant provides all of the eligibility and declaration information, the approval is instantaneous. To date, 70 percent of applications have been automatically approved. The business will immediately be emailed a voucher and a contact list of one of the 18 approved providers.

Question No. 10—Public Service

10. to the Minister for the Public Service: Does he stand by his statement, “we now engage in active monitoring of the Public Service’s use of contractors and consultants”; if so, when did the active monitoring begin?

Yes, and I refer the member to my primary answer to his question yesterday.

Simeon Brown: As part of his active monitoring of the Public Service’s use of contractors and consultants, will he be sending a memo to the Minister of Transport, who spent over $51 million on contractors and consultants on the now cancelled Auckland cycle bridge?

Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I refer the member to the answer to the supplementary question along the same lines that the member asked yesterday, and I invite him to listen.

Simeon Brown: As part of his active monitoring of the Public Service’s use of contractors and consultants, will he be sending a memo to the Minister for Broadcasting and Media, who has so far spent $10 million on contractors and consultants on the failed TVNZ-RNZ merger, which he still says he wants to progress?

Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I am satisfied in the work of the Public Service Commission in continuing to monitor the use of contractors and consultants, including in the field of broadcasting.

Hon Grant Robertson: As part of his monitoring of contractors and consultants, will he be sending a memo to the Leader of the Opposition about their use of consultants in their first—oh, sorry, Mr Speaker.

SPEAKER: No, that’s completely out of order—I think the member knows that.

Simeon Brown: As part of his active monitoring of the Public Service’s use of contractors and consultants, will he be sending a memo to the Minister for the Public Service, whose department’s spend on contractors and consultants increased from $1.4 million in 2018 to $3.4 million last year?

Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I refer the member to his media release of Sunday just gone, where he acknowledged that it is appropriate for all Government departments at some point to use contractors and consultants.

Simeon Brown: As part of his active monitoring of the Public Service’s use of contractors and consultants, will he be sending a memo to the Minister of Education, where expenditure on contractors and consultants was over $600,000 per day last year, up from $100,000 a day when Chris Hipkins used to complain about that in Opposition?

Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I remain satisfied in the work of the Public Service Commission in its monitoring function of the use of consultants and contractors, and I’m pleased to see the member is taking good use of the information that that is yielding.

Question No. 11—Finance

11. to the Minister of Finance: Does he think that banks have unfairly profited from economic circumstances during the COVID-19 pandemic while ordinary people in Aotearoa are doing it tough; if so, what actions is he taking to redress the balance?

In answer to the first part of the question, as the member and I have discussed several times before, banks in New Zealand have made large profits since well before the COVID-19 pandemic. In terms of the question of unfair profit, I would note, in terms of the pandemic, the approach taken by the Reserve Bank has mirrored most other countries in the face of enormous uncertainty about the volatility of bond markets and liquidity. In answer to the second part of the question, the Government acknowledges that many New Zealanders have been, and are, doing it tough. That’s why we have taken a number of actions to help ordinary people in Aotearoa, including increasing benefits, superannuation, the family tax credit, student allowances, and lifting the minimum wage. We’ve also provided a temporary cost of living payment, cut fuel excise tax and road-user charges, and halved the cost of public transport. We’ve increased access to subsidised childcare, made doctors visits cheaper, provided free lunches in schools, and introduced a winter energy payment. The Government is focused on easing the cost of living pressures on ordinary New Zealanders while also managing the books in a careful and responsible manner.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Is he aware if Adrian Orr’s recent comments that “revenue raising through other alternatives makes the job of monetary policy easier.”; if so, what fiscal initiatives is he considering to make the job of monetary policy easier?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: In answer to the first part of that question, yes.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does he agree with former Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, who said last year that bank profits are unjustifiable; or does he agree with current Prime Minister Chris Hipkins, who has said, “There are some New Zealanders who perhaps aren’t contributing their fair share.”?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Yes.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does he agree that a levy on excess profits in the banking sector would be an effective way to fund the recovery from Cyclone Gabrielle because it would avoid exacerbating inflation; if not, why not?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As I’ve noted in this House, the Government is doing as the previous Government did in the wake of Canterbury earthquakes, taking our time to work through possible ways of funding the costs that inevitably come with the significant recovery and rebuild programmes. No final decisions have been made on that.

Chlöe Swarbrick: What genuine obstacles are there to the Government implementing an excess-profit tax on banks whose massive profits can be seen as linked to the unique economic circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic economic response?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I don’t think there are particular obstacles other than going through the process of thinking about how to make a decision like that. As I noted in my primary answer, bank profits in New Zealand have been high for a long period of time, so I don’t necessarily buy that part of the member’s argument with respect to COVID-19. As I’ve also said in the past, banks have to have an eye to their social licence. The way that they operate—for example, in response to a cyclone—is a way that both the Government and members of the public may judge their social licence.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does he accept that urgent economic decisions made during the COVID-19 pandemic have resulted in a significant transfer of wealth to the richest few in Aotearoa; and if so, does he think that it is incumbent on a Labour Minister of Finance to redress that balance?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The member and I have discussed this matter before as well. The only way that the number that I’ve heard about, which I noticed she chose not to use in the question, could be justified—$20 billion or something—would be by including every single transfer to a small-business owner in New Zealand. Not all small-business owners in New Zealand would be regarded as extremely wealthy. In fact, many of them do it very tough every day, just getting through. So I understand the point the member’s making, but I don’t think the way that it’s been expressed is entirely accurate.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Can he look the people of Aotearoa in the eye and tell them that everyone is paying their fair share of tax; and if not, when will he sort it out and tax the rich?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: In answer to the first part of the question, we always have to strive to make sure that all New Zealanders are paying their fair share, and, in fact, I think it was in the House last week that I expressed the view that we are not there yet, and I made particular reference then to the taxation of multinationals.

Question No. 12—Broadcasting and Media

12. to the Minister for Broadcasting and Media: Does he stand by all of the Government’s views and actions regarding the proposals to merge RNZ and TVNZ into Aotearoa New Zealand Public Media?

Yes, at the time they were made.

Melissa Lee: Does the Minister stand by his statement, “When we don’t have a cyclone and we don’t have the floods of the century, [who knows] we might be able to roll that merger out.”

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Oh, the member needs to put that in context in terms of the merger. The merger is well and truly over and yesterday we were talking in a different environment. The reality is that the merger is finished; the merger is over. We will not be bringing it back, not now and not in the future and not in the upcoming campaign.

Melissa Lee: Can he confirm that the Government is paying on the $1.19 million lease for empty office spaces in Wellington for the cancelled RNZ-TVNZ merger while overly generously paid consultants continue to assist his $8,000-a-day board for a wash-out report?

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: The establishment board has met 1½ times in the last month. We have to get a report; that’s the professional thing to do. And when you enter into lease agreements, the New Zealand law is you must pay them.

Melissa Lee: Is the reason the Minister only found out the RNZ-TVNZ merger “will stop on the day of the announcement, which is 8 February 2023”, because he hadn’t read his Cabinet papers or that the Cabinet paper was only tabled at the meeting?

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: No.

Melissa Lee: Who is correct: the Prime Minister saying the merger will stop or the broadcasting Minister saying that “Well, we might be able to roll out the merger.”?

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: I 100 percent support the Prime Minister. The reality is that the merger is over. I’m not sure how many times we need to say that. The Prime Minister announced that on 8 February and I’ll announce it now just for that member: the merger is over.