Oral Questions

1. to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his Government’s statements and actions?

Yes, I do. And absolutely, what a year. Inflation is down, interest rates are down, tax relief has been delivered, fast track delivered, confidence is rising, growth is coming back, crime is falling, police are on the beat, gangs are on the run, phones are gone from class, and kids are getting back to school. We don’t need a year of delivery. Every year this team delivers. And that’s what we’re doing—we’re getting New Zealand back on track and cleaning up Labour’s mess.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Why are he and Nicola Willis the only people surprised to learn that when you slash jobs, the bill for unemployment benefits goes up, the tax take goes down, and the economy stalls; or is this one of the economic lessons from the last 35 years that he thinks he needs to relearn?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: My goodness! The member has no economic credibility. I mean, this was a Prime Minister that increased spending by 84 percent, drove up domestic inflation, drove up interest rates, put the economy into recession, and that raises unemployment. And he has the audacity to stand up and ask us questions on economics. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: I’ll just remind everyone that we will be coming to a fairly boisterous debate later in the afternoon, but we don’t want to get there too quickly, because there’s a lot of other business to be done before that.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Does his definition of “delivery” include an announcement about an announcement with no budget, no build specifications, no builder, no concrete time frame, no actual ships, and, if not, what exactly has Nicola Willis actually delivered when it comes to the Interislander?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, Nicola Willis is going to go down as the best finance Minister this country has ever seen, because by God what a mess she has picked up. She is cleaning house and she’s getting the job done. And she has delivered a value-for-money, reliable, sensible ferry solution of rail-compatible ferries. And our great Minister for Rail’s got a limited window to try and improve upon it, otherwise we’re going to get new ferries in 2029. Don’t you worry about it. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: I couldn’t hear most of that answer because of the loud noise coming from both sides of the House. So for that reason, I won’t ask the Prime Minister to repeat it. But when a question is being asked, even on the last day where we’re all a bit excited, please don’t talk behind the person asking the question.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Does his definition of “dumb stuff” that he said he was going to cut include spending nearly $14 million on the administration of the flailing FamilyBoost scheme that’s only paid out $16 million so far, and is helping fewer than half the families he promised?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Isn’t it ironic? The Labour Party used to care about working New Zealanders. This is the same party that actually opposed tax relief for low and middle income workers for the first time in 14 years. It’s now getting all petty about a FamilyBoost programme designed to help working families with early childhood costs, which are incredibly high, thanks to the last Labour Government. We’ve got 100,000 people eligible, we’ve got 60,000 that have actually claimed, and we’ve got about 42,000 that are actually settled. When you talk to people, they say it’s a simple process: get on myIR. And I appreciate the member raising it, because we want as many people as possible getting their money back.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: If it’s such a simple process—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Wait on—wait, wait.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: —why is it costing almost as much to administer—

SPEAKER: No, no, hang on. No. When I start speaking, please stop. Would you mind asking the question again, because a lot of people were talking over the top of you, probably including me, but I have every right to.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: If it’s such a simple system, how come it’s almost costing more to administer than it’s actually paying out to families?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I’d just say to that member: don’t you want to help low and middle income working New Zealanders through a cost of living crisis? That’s what we’re doing on this side. We’re making sure we actually help people. How have we helped them? Inflation relief, interest rate relief, tax relief, FamilyBoost, Working for Families credits—that’s what you do when you care about working New Zealanders, unlike you lot.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Why did his Government cut funding for childhood immunisation services, despite warnings that those cuts would lead to a whooping cough epidemic, and given that that whooping cough epidemic is now a reality, will he admit that that was a mistake?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I’d just reject the characterisation of that question, because we’ve had a very good uptake, having inherited very low immunisation rates from the last Labour Government. I’m proud of the work that we’ve done in partnering with iwi to drive immunisation rates with Māori under-two-year-olds. That’s great work. Actually, we have a whooping cough epidemic in this country, and the task for parents—and we’re making it as easy as possible—is to go get your kids vaccinated, and get yourself vaccinated, as well.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Which of the following best reflects his Government’s priorities: $3 billion in tax cuts for landlords while cutting first-home buyer grants, $200 million in tax cuts for tobacco companies while the number of daily smokers increases for the first time in recent history, real-terms cuts to the minimum wage while directors’ fees increase by up to 100 percent, or saying that he wouldn’t borrow for tax cuts, only to increase Government borrowing by a record amount?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, look, given I’m getting economic questions from a leader of a party that famously said, “We will absolutely need to increase debt.”. After having taken the keys to the car, driving it at great speed, and putting it in the ditch because of the economic mismanagement and vandalism, we’re hauling it out of the ditch and we’re getting it turned up the right way, and you can criticise as much as you like, but, actually, you had your go and you screwed it up. [Interruption]

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Mr Speaker—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: We’re now silent.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Is the reason Andrew Bayly faced no sanction for calling someone working late “a loser”, he defended Penny Simmonds’ claims that disability support workers were ripping off the system, and his Government passed law changes stripping away workers’ rights because those actions actually reflect what his Government thinks, which is that Kiwis who work hard for a living are losers and—to use his own words—“bottom feeders”?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, let me just look and compare and contrast the record of this Government versus—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: No, just a moment. Enough—the man had hardly stood up and the noise started. So just button it back.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: It was the way he stood up.

SPEAKER: I’ve got an immediate response, and I’m biting my tongue off. The right honourable Prime Minister.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I am very, very proud of this Government’s record with working New Zealanders, because—let’s go through it. Wages grew slower than inflation for 13 quarters in a row under a Labour Government. They’ve had four quarters of wages growing faster than inflation under this Government. This is a Government that gave low and middle income working New Zealanders sensible tax relief for the first time in 14 years—not an ideological issue at all; just sensible common sense. This is a Government that reduced the Auckland regional fuel tax. We got rid of the ute tax. I can tell you that average rents since we’ve come into power are stable and not up $180 per week, as they were under the Labour Government. Inflation is down, interest rates are down, tax relief is being dealt to, and we have supported New Zealanders—low and middle income New Zealanders—through a cost of living crisis created by that Government.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: So why does he think he’s the most unpopular Prime Minister in New Zealand’s history, and what does he think Nicola Willis is more likely to replace next year: the interisland ferries, or him, as Prime Minister?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Oh, I mean, that is a bit rich, isn’t it? Isn’t that a bit rich? How are the conversations with David Parker and Kieran McAnulty working out, son?

SPEAKER: OK, so it is the last day of Parliament. There’s normally a high degree of levity and excitement around the place, but that question has sort of soaked it all up. So we’ll just calm it from here.

Question No. 2—Prime Minister

2 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?]

our action to pass fast track yesterday. I saw, last night, that one very brave Green MP acknowledged he’s been listening at question time, saying in the House, “The Prime Minister wants to tell us that we should be supporting [fast track] because of the renewable energy projects, because of the housing projects”, and I couldn’t be more pleased that my message is finally cutting through to some Green Party MPs. And it’s not too late, because fast track might now be the law—thank you, David Parker, for the inspiration—but there’s still just so much more growth and development to come. So, once again, and not for the last time, I call on all those Green MPs who actually care about climate change to back the projects, back the economy, and back renewable energy and housing for working New Zealanders, because we need to grow this joint.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does the Prime Minister stand by his statement that “We’ve set ambitious goals for ourselves.”, and, if so, can he please outline for the House what exactly is ambitious about his Government’s goals to decrease emissions and persistent child poverty by just 1 percent?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I’d just say, on the point about emissions, I’m very proud that our emissions reduction plan 2, delivered by an excellent climate change Minister, who is actually managing to deliver net zero six years earlier and keep our economy growing—well done. I’m very, very proud of that. We’re on track to deliver net carbon zero 2050, as we’ve committed to doing. The means may be different by which the Green Party may wish to do it, but we don’t want to total our economy. We actually want to make sure we grow our economy, we want to make sure we get things built in this country, and we want to support low and middle income, working New Zealanders.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Can the Prime Minister confirm that his Government has cut services for vulnerable children and whānau, increased benefit sanctions by 133 percent, and cut 9,000 jobs from the public sector, with 1,500 more to go at Health New Zealand, while setting aside $2.9 billion in tax cuts for landlords, in just this year alone?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I’ll pick one of those things, which is that I am very proud of the obligations that we have put around the unemployment jobseeker benefit, and that is entirely appropriate. We want to have a safety net, we want to support people when they need help, and that is funded by your fellow citizens and fellow taxpayers. But there are also obligations: meet with your case manager, put a resumé together, and show up for the job interviews.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Is there a job for every New Zealander who is currently unemployed and on the jobseeker benefit?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: We are working hard to make sure we get off welfare and into work. But what we’re not going to do is what the last Labour-Greens Government did, which is have low unemployment at 3.2 percent and yet 70,000 more people on the jobseeker benefit. We think there’s a better pathway for people, which is a life of work, and that’s why we’re doing everything we can to get the economy growing; to support low and middle income, working New Zealanders; and to make sure we get people off welfare and into work, which is great for them and their families.

Chlöe Swarbrick: What is a better—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Just hang on. Just wait; there’s a lot of noise from both sides of the House that doesn’t need to be there.

Chlöe Swarbrick: What is a better use of public funds: $3 billion in tax cuts for property speculators, or funding essential services that all New Zealanders rely on?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, what’s not acceptable is increasing spending by 84 percent, borrowing more, taxing more, spending more, hiring more, and—on every account—delivering worse outcomes under a Labour-Green Government. That’s what we saw over the last six years. We’re not doing that; we’re making sure there is maximum value for money, that we are getting resources moved from the back office to the front line, and we’re investing for growth.

Hon David Seymour: Did the Government cut taxes for landlords or simply restore the very consistent and sensible tax policy that was the case for the first four years of the Labour-Green Government?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I am proud of what we have done to make sure that we stabilise rents for renters. Isn’t it interesting: since this Government came to office, average rents have not increased. They went up $180 per week; that causes huge pain and suffering on working New Zealanders. This is a Government that, by restoring interest deductibility—a legitimate business expense—by removing the brightline back to two years, and ensuring we get the balance right between tenants and landlords, has ensured that we actually have rental stability in this country.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Point of order, sir. Thank you very much, sir. Just for the clarity of the House, if a Minister makes an incorrect statement today, when are they expected to correct that: by the end of today’s sitting, or will they have to correct it in the first sitting day back next year?

SPEAKER: Well, it’s the first opportunity that they—where the House is sitting, first opportunity after they know or are able to confirm that there has been a mistake in something they’ve said.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Can the Prime Minister confirm that since coming to office, rents have increased at double the rate of average Consumers Price Index inflation?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Labour and Greens quoted that number at me last week, and I just would say to you that, since we came to power, our rents have been stable. If you take the full year, which is including the period of a Labour-Greens Government, rents are up as you’ve talked about. But you’ve taken an annual number, rather than the number from when we came to office. That’s what we measure ourselves against.

SPEAKER: Question No. 3, Rawiri Waititi. Can the member just wait while the House, seriously, goes into silence. Please go ahead.

Question No. 3—Prime Minister

3. to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his Government’s statements and actions?

Yes.

Rawiri Waititi: Does he agree that the poor economic outlook in the half-yearly fiscal update is a consequence of his Government’s decisions?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: It is a consequence of economic mismanagement and vandalism over the previous six years, but this a Government cleaning it up, and haven’t we made tremendous progress? Inflation is back under 3 percent for the first time in a long time. We have had, actually, three interest rate cuts after having, I think, 12 interest rate rises. We have business confidence, farmer confidence, consumer confidence, and more Kiwis thinking New Zealand is heading in the right direction.

Rawiri Waititi: Does he agree that it would be unfair to judge his Government for the poor forecast of the half-yearly fiscal update because one year is not long enough to influence any significant change?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, our Government is taking responsibility for the challenging economic conditions we’ve inherited, and that is why our plan is so important for the future of New Zealand. What we know, and as we heard from Katie Bradford last night, is that if we allowed Labour to carry on running the show, it would actually be a lot worse with respect to our deficits and our surplus. What we know is that the shadow Minister says surplus is a moot point. We know the current leader of the Labour Party, the Rt Hon Chris Hipkins, says we absolutely need to increase debt. Taxing more, spending more, borrowing more, hiring more, and non-delivery has led us to this position. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: Just a moment. There’s a member on my left who is commentating on every answer given. Commentary is not required and not allowed under the Standing Orders. Rare and reasonable interjections.

Rawiri Waititi: Why, then, did his Government decide to disestablish Te Aka Whai Ora, because the authority was unable to unwind 182 years of oppression and unequal treatment in only nine months?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Sorry, can you ask the question again?

Rawiri Waititi: So why did his Government decide to disestablish Te Aka Whai Ora, because the authority was unable to unwind 182 years of oppression and unequal treatment in only nine months?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Because we don’t believe that creating big bureaucracies and massive centralisation is the way in which you improve outcomes for Māori. We are fixated on actually improving outcomes. Despite the much-vaunted Māori caucus and a Labour-Greens Government advocating for Māori, outcomes for Māori went backwards, and so we are determined to make sure that we take them forwards. The fact that Te Pāti Māori hasn’t had a conversation about why nine out of 10 young Māori students heading into high school are not where they need to be in mathematics is shameful.

SPEAKER: One more.

Rawiri Waititi: Thank you. Fine choice. What does the Prime Minister say about the economist Bernard Hickey’s statement that “Treasury reports public service spending cuts to pay for lower taxes for landlords are shrivelling the economy, lifting spending on benefits, pumping up public debt & will put 20,000 more out of work”?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I reject the characterisation that interest deductibility is a tax. Interest deductibility is a legitimate business expense, and the reality is that we have actually seen stable rents across this country since this Government came to office versus increases of $180 per week on average. The measures we’ve taken—interest deductibility, brightline test readjustment, and getting the balance right between tenants and landlords—have made a difference in the rental market.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Is the Prime Minister’s message to Te Pāti Māori and some of its supporters something that’s totally alien: that shortly, they’ll have to get off their backside and do some work?

SPEAKER: I don’t think that’s something the Prime Minister has any responsibility for.

Rawiri Waititi: In short, what does the PM say about the Government’s austerity policy driving the economy into a deeper and longer recession, that means it will have to borrow $20 billion more over the next four years than it stated six months ago?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I’ll just say there is no doubt if we carried on with the previous lot, the economic mismanagement would be worse. But this is a Government that has found the right approach, because we know carrying on the programme as it was—spend more, tax more, borrow more—put us in this mess. What we know on this side is that we are finding a balanced approach through it by making sure that we actually move resources from the back office to the front line, we get value for money for every dollar being spent, we deliver tax relief to low and middle income working New Zealanders—who that side should be caring about but don’t seem to any more—and, importantly, we’re laying up the conditions for future growth.

Question No. 4—Social Development and Employment

4. to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Does she stand by her statement that “This Government is absolutely and deliberately focused on supporting people into employment, and the way we measure our success is to have 50,000 fewer people on the jobseeker benefit by 2030”; if so, does HYEFU 2024’s jobseeker forecast of a 36,000 increase by 2026 since she took office mean this target is on or off track?

Yes, absolutely. Our Government is committed to having 50,000 fewer people on the jobseeker benefit by 2030 and achieving this target is a priority for our Government. Jobseeker numbers have been rising steadily since 2022 and are expected to peak in January 2025. The forecast has always been for the numbers to get worse before they get better. When jobseeker numbers started increasing during the global financial crisis in May 2008, there were around 85,000 people on the equivalent of jobseeker benefit; our starting point was 190,000. Unfortunately, we’ve inherited a low-growth economy where unemployment was forecast to increase above 5 percent. Treasury now forecasts this economic downturn to be longer and deeper compared to the Budget update. That’s why our Government’s work is to rebuild the economy and support more job seekers into work.

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: How can her target to reduce jobseeker beneficiary numbers by 50,000 be on track when the Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update forecasts there will still be 204,000 people on jobseeker benefit in 2029, and her target for 2030 is 140,000 jobseeker beneficiaries?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: Very simply because, unlike the previous Government, we’re not willing to sit back and watch the numbers grow. So what we have done in the last 12 months, in addition to setting target, we’ve got now 70,000 people in case management; we’ve got 2,100 with job coaches; we’ve introduced phone-based case management; we’ve introduced a traffic light system so jobseekers know where they’re at. Our Government isn’t sitting back and watching the numbers increase; we are taking every opportunity with an active welfare system, and I’m so proud of the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) front line, they are working incredibly hard to get more New Zealanders into work.

SPEAKER: OK, brief answers are quite good ones.

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Has she spoken to her finance Minister about the record numbers of people on benefit, and her beneficiary reduction target being at risk, given it is the economic conditions and job losses en masse that are putting her target at risk, or will she solely rely on sanctioning beneficiaries to get her numbers down?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: I would like to go through that list of all the things we’ve done in the last 12 months, but you have said to keep my answers brief. So what I would say is: our plan is working. In the last five months, we have seen over 30,000 New Zealanders on the jobseeker benefit exit into work despite very challenging economic conditions, and that’s what I’m proud of.

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Is she concerned that MSD themselves have decreased some of their own targets for getting people into jobs because of the worsening economic conditions, and how can she then assert that her 50,000 jobseeker reduction target is still achievable?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: As I said in my answer to the primary, the jobseeker numbers were expected to peak in January 2025. Unfortunately, because the economic conditions are going to be worse, deeper, for longer—because of the record we have inherited—the jobseeker numbers will be higher than we anticipated; actually, not as far as we would have expected, so we’re on track. We’ve got a challenging, ambitious target, but for not one day will we shy away from helping more Kiwis into work.

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: What does she say to the New Zealanders who will be accessing welfare support this Christmas, Christmas 2026, Christmas 2027, Christmas 2028, and Christmas 2029, given the economic outlook is so bleak that the unemployment rate will not even be back to 2023 levels by 2029?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: I have this simple message for New Zealanders this Christmas: it is challenging when someone loses their job, it’s challenging for them and their families. Unfortunately, one of the realities when you have high inflation, high Government spending, high interest rates, and a recession: unemployment follows. What I will say to New Zealanders is this Government is unwilling to destine young New Zealanders to 18 years on welfare if they go on to a jobseeker benefit under 25. We are doing everything to help them into work.

Question No. 5—Finance

5. to the Minister of Finance: What recent announcements has she made on Government finances?

Can I say in advance the draft answers to these questions are very dry. A year ago, I found myself talking about sausages, and I do not intend to repeat that mistake. Yesterday, I released the Budget Policy Statement, and in it I set out the Government’s response to a review of operating balance indicators, including the contribution of ACC. Among Government entities, ACC is distinctive. It is a long-term, levy-funded scheme whose funding is driven by the need to have assets matching the expected lifetime cost of outstanding claims. Those assets are currently around $50 billion, and mismatches between ACC’s assets and its outstanding claims liability are intended to be reduced gradually over a 10-year period. It’s not a pay-as-you-go scheme that results in annual costs to the Crown or annual revenue for the Crown.

Dana Kirkpatrick: How do ACC’s results affect the operating balance indicator?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: OBEGAL—the operating balance before gains and losses—was previously the Government’s key operating balance indicator. ACC’s contribution to OBEGAL has grown in recent years from a billion-dollar deficit in 2021-22 to $4.1 billion in 2023-24. Its deficit is forecast to average around $4 billion per annum over the forecast period. Having ACC in the Government’s headline operating indicator gives too much weight to the point-in-time position of a self-sustaining, long-term insurance scheme which should have no impact on tax and spending decisions elsewhere in Government.

Dana Kirkpatrick: What change has the Government made in response to these issues?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: The Government has decided to look through ACC’s deficits or surpluses when setting and monitoring its short-term fiscal intentions. These deficits or surpluses do not matter for short-term fiscal policy. The simplest way to look through them is to take ACC revenue and expenses out of the OBEGAL. That is what we’ve done by creating a new measure called OBEGALx, which is simply OBEGAL excluding ACC. People who are attached to OBEGAL—and who knows if members opposite have made their mind up on that, because they haven’t made their mind up on borrowing tax, or anything for that matter, but if they are attached to OBEGAL, that measure will continue to be reported as a fiscal indicator.

Dana Kirkpatrick: What reaction has she had to this change of indicator?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: This change has been well signalled, and I think people understand there is an issue that needs to be addressed. For example, I saw a report from the BNZ yesterday that said, “the Government introduced a new fiscal balance this HYEFU called OBEGALX, the X standing for ‘excluding ACC’. The rationale for this is that ACC is a self-funding Crown Entity which is [currently] running a significant deficit. The view is that fiscal policy should not be adjusted to compensate for what should be a self-correcting ACC deficit over time. We agree with this stance.”

Question No. 6—Regional Development

6. to the Minister for Regional Development: What updates can he provide to New Zealanders on actions the Government has taken to restore prosperity to the regions?

Our Government is focused on growing the economy. After a long period of an absence of a development strategy and far too much influence from the woke-riddled Wellington belt, we are now turning our attention to the ideas and the energy within the regions. As evidence of that, a sum approaching $200 million has been ring-fenced to boost climate change adaptability and, also, geothermal developments. This technology reflects a report that lay gathering dust—moulding—over the last four or five years while Marsden Point was, sadly, closed down by the other side of the House.

Andy Foster: What can the Minister report on the regional summits he has held across the country?

Hon SHANE JONES: Unheralded popularity. It’s important that we acknowledge that when Wellington-based advisers venture out into the regions, the practical effect of ideas conceived in Wellington offices strike reality. The summits have been an opportunity to meet and greet people. Occasionally, there have been one or three protesters as I’ve sought to engage with garden-variety Kiwis, but the days of those mung bean - meddlers are over.

Andy Foster: What steps has the Government taken to support the development of regional aquaculture?

Hon SHANE JONES: The most recent report on primary produce export revenue shows there’s an enormous future waiting for development in regional aquaculture. A sum of over $600 million was recorded this year, in terms of export revenue; a small but growing proportion of the $2.2 billion which is sourced in the regions in terms of fisheries revenue. Obviously, aquaculture is now going to enjoy an amazing growth period because for the next 20 years there will be no need for any more resource consents; they have been guaranteed. No more meddling from the Department of Conservation, no more interfering from unwise decision makers and regional councils. Certainty, confidence, and growth is about to hit regional New Zealand in the aquaculture sector, despite the best efforts of narrow-minded critics.

Andy Foster: How is the mining sector helping to support New Zealand’s regional revitalisation?

Hon SHANE JONES: Without a doubt, Taranaki will enjoy a boost with offshore mining opportunities. Sadly—

Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Take it to your backyard, then.

Hon SHANE JONES: No, that’s enough from the kūmara munchers—not going to have any of that today. Without a doubt, there is a vista of opportunity that will be delivered upon through science, technology, and economic rationalism. There may be a small group of ill-informed critics, but they will be marginalised once the triumph of science through the fast-track legislation emerges with clarity. As a final point, OMV, an international gas and oil explorer, announced at 6:30 a.m. this morning they are no longer withdrawing from New Zealand; as a consequence of the advocacy and the confidence instilled by this Government, they are staying to salvage the oil and gas industry in New Zealand. And on your behalf, New Zealand, I claim a little credit for that.

Hon Julie Anne Genter: Is maintaining the rail freight connection between the North and South Islands by ensuring we have at least one rail-enabled ferry important for the economic prosperity of the regions, particularly in the South Island?

Hon SHANE JONES: That’s a very important question and despite my willingness to put the member right, the man to my right is the appropriate person to respond to it.

Hon Julie Anne Genter: Supplementary? [Interruption]

SPEAKER: Just wait until everyone’s quiet. OK.

Hon Julie Anne Genter: Will he speak to the Ministers for rail, finance, and transport to ensure they understand the regional development and prosperity implications of not having a rail freight connection between the North and South Islands before decisions are made on ferry procurement?

Hon SHANE JONES: It’s beyond cavil; rail is important to the regions and, as the member is aware, all options will be exhaustively inquired into. But we want to see a massive improvement in the quality of management and leadership in KiwiRail; then, consequently, we’ll look at backing options that are full of common sense.

Question No. 7—Transport

7. to the Minister of Transport: What reports has he seen on State Highway 1 through the Mangamuka Gorge?

Well, I’ve seen some great news. State Highway 1 through the Mangamuka Gorge will officially reopen to traffic on Friday morning, reconnecting the Far North with the rest of New Zealand after an extensive closure caused by severe weather in August 2022. More than a thousand workers have worked on this project to clear slips, improve the resilience of a critical route to support economic growth. This reopening is a result of their hard work and comes just in time for Christmas.

Grant McCallum: What works have been delivered to ensure the Mangamuka Gorge route is reopened?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, so much work—a significant amount of work—has been done to complete and to strengthen the Mangamuka Gorge. This includes the installation of 1,337 piles; use of over 10,000 cubic metres of concrete; more than 5 kilometres of road has been repaved; and 50,000 square metres of asphalt installed, which is around the size of seven rugby fields, I am told. These critical works have addressed 36 slips to increase resilience on this critical route and get Northlanders where they want to go quickly and safely.

Grant McCallum: What will the reopening mean for locals, businesses, and tourists in Northland?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, it’s going to mean a lot for all of those people, including for the great MP for Northland, Grant McCallum. It will restore a vital reconnection for residents, freight operators, and visitors. With around 1,300 vehicles using this route daily, the improved road will ensure safe and more reliable travel. Northland has had a tough time with road closures and the opening will provide a major boost to local businesses, especially during the holiday season, which is crucial for Northland’s economy.

Grant McCallum: What message does the Minister have for Northlanders and those visiting the region this summer?

Hon Matt Doocey: You’ve got a great MP.

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Oh, well, yes, they do have a great MP up here—

SPEAKER: Well, hang on a minute.

Hon SIMEON BROWN: A very merry Christmas—

SPEAKER: No, no. Wait on. Think about the question. I don’t think that lines it up at all. It’s about “seen on State Highway 1 through the Mangamuka Gorge.”

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Which is in Northland.

SPEAKER: Your endorsing tourist activities in the Northland—it’s not part of your ministry. We’ll move on to question No. 8.

Question No. 8—Finance

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

Yes, in the context in which they were given or made.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: How can New Zealanders take her financial management seriously when she cancelled the ferries, costing the taxpayer hundreds of millions of dollars, undertook creative accounting to make her books look better, and has delivered the highest debt in decades?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: I want to begin by wishing the member a merry Christmas, but I then want to say it is a not a question to string together a set of assertions, and, a year in, she should have worked that out. Actually, our position has remained, which is that we are going to be a Government that is careful about New Zealanders’ tax and how we spend it. We are a Government that is going to drive growth, and we are a Government that has been consistent in our position that we want to see New Zealanders getting tax relief and we want to see the debt curve burn down. That member, on the other hand, within the space of two radio interviews this morning, managed to want more borrowing, less borrowing, more tax, less tax. She needs to make up her mind.

SPEAKER: Before the member resumes her questioning, I just want to say this. I’ve cut off one question because it was getting out of order. I will cut off other questions if people don’t want to listen to the answer. That was a constant commentary from a large number of people on my left.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: What evidence, if any, does she have that a strategy of cuts would lead to growth?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: That’s not our strategy.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Does she agree with Christopher Luxon, who said, “Nicola Willis and myself understand economics. We understand Budgets. We understand numbers.”, and, if so, can she point me to some evidence of this, because I can’t find any?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Yes, I do agree with the Prime Minister, and what I put myself through this morning—

SPEAKER: No, with all due respect to the member from a seat not too far from where I live: keep quiet.

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: And what I put myself through this morning was the endurance battle of reading the transcripts of Chris Hipkins and Barbara Edmonds as they tried to explain what their policy for the economy would be, and across the course of several interviews, they demonstrated no understanding of economics whatsoever.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Going from the first supplementary question that you were asked, how can the Minister be responsible for the greatest debt ever when 80 percent of the Crown debt incurred here, at this point in time, was incurred under Labour?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: The Deputy Prime Minister makes a very good point. As I shared with the House yesterday, net core Crown debt went from $57 billion to $175 billion during the six years of the Labour Government, and now their position is that somehow that’s our fault.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Talk about denial.

SPEAKER: Hang on, they’re asking a question.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Is her Christmas present for Kiwis higher debt, more borrowing, no ferries, fewer jobs, more Kiwis moving overseas, and no growth?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: No. This Government’s Christmas present to Kiwis is inflation under control for the first time in three years. Our Christmas present to Kiwis is official cash rate reductions, meaning cheaper mortgages. Our Christmas present to Kiwis is tax relief for the first time in 14 years, including FamilyBoost payments for kids in early childhood education. And here’s the best present of all: next year we will deliver a growing economy with more opportunities and more choices for New Zealanders. That member may have lost sight of the importance of that, but I know that Kiwis will welcome it.

Question No. 9—Mental Health

9. to the Minister for Mental Health: What recent announcement has he made regarding faster access to mental health and suicide prevention support through the Government’s Mental Health and Addiction Community Sector Innovation Fund?

More good news for mental health. Today’s announcement continues to deliver on the Government’s commitment to faster access to mental health and addiction support. I’m pleased to announce the first three recipients of the Government’s Mental Health and Addiction Community Sector Innovation Fund: Youthline, the Sir John Kirwan Foundation, and MATES in Construction. Youthline will receive funding to expand its Counselling Your Way programme, which is an eight-session structured intervention programme for young people aged 16 to 24. The Sir John Kirwan Foundation will receive funding to scale up Mitey, a free early-intervention preventative initiative that trains teachers to support children aged five to 13. MATES in Construction will receive funding for its community workplace-based programme, which aims to enhance the wellbeing of the construction industry workers and to build resilience within the industry. This extra funding will help expand its programme in main centres and into small regions around New Zealand.

Paulo Garcia: Why was a matched-funding approach chosen for this fund?

Hon MATT DOOCEY: This fund will allow organisations who are already receiving philanthropic funding to scale up their innovative ideas and help deliver more Kiwis with faster access to mental health and addiction support. The first three organisations being announced today will share more than $2 million from the mental health innovation fund, with this being matched with an additional $2 million in philanthropic funding, meaning the total investment in new mental health services announced today doubles to $4 million.

Paulo Garcia: Why is the Government partnering with NGOs and community groups?

Hon MATT DOOCEY: I’ve firmly become of the view that some of the ideas and solutions to the mental health issues in New Zealand are already in the sector; they just need to be listened to and backed. That’s what we’ve done today with the Government committing to get money out of Wellington and into the front line of NGO and community services. On this side of the House, we know Wellington doesn’t always know best. That’s why we’re backing hard-working NGOs and community organisations who are primed for growth and ready to respond to more timely access to mental health support among Kiwis.

Paulo Garcia: How will this announcement support the Minister’s priorities for mental health?

Hon MATT DOOCEY: Today’s announcement will support my four priorities as New Zealand’s first mental health Minister: to increase access to timely mental health and addiction support, to grow the mental health and addiction workforce, to strengthen the focus on prevention and early intervention, and to target 25 percent of investment towards prevention and early intervention.

Benjamin Doyle: What does the Minister think the value of takatāpui and rainbow-specific mental health and suicide prevention organisations is, like OutLine Aotearoa?

Hon MATT DOOCEY: For that member, he will be happy to know that out of the $5 million for the mental health and addiction innovation fund, we’ve only announced $2 million of that. There is still $3 million available this year. And, equally, applications will open for next year’s $5 million fund, again committing to delivering faster access to mental health and addiction support for all Kiwis.

Benjamin Doyle: Does he think there are some instances where criteria for funding should be based on the unique and significant needs of marginalised communities, like takatāpui and rainbow; if not, why not?

Hon MATT DOOCEY: I’ve always been very clear that the mental health and addiction innovation fund is no silver bullet. It’s no surprise that every fund has criteria. Some services might meet the criteria for this fund or they mightn’t, but I’ve been very clear as the mental health and addiction Minister that I’m going to try new things. This is one thing I’ve tried, and it’s already delivering.

Question No. 10—Children

10. to the Minister for Children: Does she stand by cuts to community provider contracts; if so, why?

For one last time this year: there has not been a cut to the overall amount Oranga Tamariki is spending on contracted providers. There are contracts that will expire and not be renewed, some that Oranga Tamariki has decided to reduce, and others that will be increased. Oranga Tamariki spent more than $500 million with providers last year, and I’m advised we’re on track to do so again this year. However, unlike in the past, Oranga Tamariki is no longer accepting underutilisation and under-delivery, and it’s making sure it’s actually getting what it is paying for. This is what taxpayers expect and deserve when the Government is spending their hard-earned money and, actually, it’s what most vulnerable children and young people deserve too.

Hon Willow-Jean Prime: Is she seriously saying that cutting Stand Tū Māia’s contract in April next year—an organisation that provides specialised trauma treatment and intensive wraparound family support for thousands of highly vulnerable children and their families, with a waiting list of over 450 children—is the right thing to do?

Hon KAREN CHHOUR: Oranga Tamariki have two contracts with Stand Tū Māia, plus pay equity: integrated outcome agreement, originally $18.77 million per year; services in schools, $1.34 million per year; pay equity uplift, which was $5.18 million for the year. And Oranga Tamariki has reached a resolution with Stand Tū Māia and legal proceedings were withdrawn. The terms of this resolution are confidential to all parties involved and Oranga Tamariki is still having discussions with Stand Tū Māia about future procurement.

Hon Willow-Jean Prime: Why didn’t she go back to the Minister of Finance to ask for extra money when Stand Tū Māia has been told the reason their contract for last resort services to thousands of children has been cut is that there is no more funding left this year?

Hon KAREN CHHOUR: To be perfectly frank: that is the reason why we’re in this problem in the first place, because spending more money seems to have been the solution to all the problems. But we’ve seen it actually isn’t. Outcomes got worse; children were suffering because nothing was based on outcomes. It was based on output, and we’re not going to do that any more.

Hon Willow-Jean Prime: Will there be more cuts to community providers delivering front-line services in the next financial year?

Hon KAREN CHHOUR: It’s normal process to go over contracts when they’re being renewed. If they are providing the service that is required of them and that is required of the priority spaces which this Government is doing, then they will continue. If they are not providing the service that they’re supposed to, if they are underutilising and if they’re not providing the service they should, then they won’t continue.

Hon Willow-Jean Prime: Is it true that despite all the word games, in fact, she has broken a promise to the people of New Zealand that front-line services would not be impacted, when across the country we have seen cuts to vital services for our most vulnerable children and whānau?

Hon KAREN CHHOUR: I campaigned saying that more money does not fix a problem. What fixes a problem is actually making sure that we’re delivering the outcomes that are needed for our most vulnerable children. The outcomes have not got better over the last six years. They will get better when the focus is clear and precise that we need to concentrate on children and young people in care and children that come to the attention of Oranga Tamariki.

Question No. 11—Regulation

Thank you, Mr Speaker, and merry Christmas to you. My question is to the Minister—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: No. I’m going to take supps off him if he keeps that up.

11. to the Minister for Regulation: What recent announcements has he made regarding regulatory sector reviews?

Today, I released the early childhood education, or ECE, regulatory review report, the first major report from the Ministry for Regulation. The report makes 15 recommendations to modernise and simplify regulations across ECE so that service providers can get on with what they do best: providing safe, high-quality spaces for children to reach their potential. The ministry has recommended removing, changing, or merging approximately three-quarters of the 98 licensing criteria for centre-based services, simplifying the system so it focuses on children’s welfare and education instead of paperwork. I’ve accepted all 15 of the review’s recommendations for regulatory changes, ranging across licensing workforce compliance and regulation. In order to promote innovation, quality, and growth, I’ll be taking a paper to Cabinet in the new year with the intention of implementing these recommendations.

Todd Stephenson: How did the Ministry for Regulation form these recommendations?

Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: The Ministry for Regulation went out and listened to people who use and operate and regulate early childhood centres. The terms of reference were based on a paper agreed by Cabinet on 5 June, and over the following six months the ministry analysed nearly 2,300 submissions and written feedback; met with parents and caregivers, providers, and workers; visited 16 early childhood centres; and conducted a series of structured interviews and workshops with agencies that engage with or regulate the sector. I want to thank everyone who’s been part of this. It’s been done in less than six months. I think it’s a fantastic piece of work that the sector’s long been calling for.

Todd Stephenson: Has he received any feedback from the early childhood education sector?

Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: I most certainly have. To spare the House’s time, I will refer to only two. One, Kelly Seaburg, Director of Advocates for Early Learning Excellence, says, “For once the sector feels like we are working with the various ministries to create meaningful change, rather than having continuous change that have had unintended consequences foisted upon hard-working ECE teachers.”

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: What did the teachers say?

Hon Peeni Henare: What about kōhanga reo?

Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: And yes, many teachers and kōhanga reo were consulted as part of this review. What’s more, it means “providers can focus on what matters most—teaching and supporting New Zealand’s children to grow and thrive early and be successful in school, by removing unnecessary administrative burdens that are not linked to quality or safety. In turn, parents will have an even greater level of confidence in the system and what it is delivering for their whānau.” That was Cathy Wilson, the Chief Executive of Montessori Aotearoa New Zealand. I’d love to go on—

SPEAKER: No. I—

Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: —we even consulted the unions—but I won’t.

SPEAKER: No, there’s absolutely no need. The member’s done very well.

Todd Stephenson: What other announcements has he made regarding other regulatory sector reviews?

Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: Last week, I announced the third sector review—following the second, which will report shortly, into the importation and regulation of agricultural and horticultural products. This third sector review I have to say some members of the Government who will remain nameless weren’t initially enthusiastic about or didn’t see the value in because it’s into the hairdresser and barber industry. The sector is regulated under the Health Act. What we’re going to be doing at the Ministry for Regulation is going into the salons and the barbershops of this country, and listening to people who are absolutely sick and tired of being overregulated. Once we hear what they say, just like we have with ECE, we’re going to get rid of the red tape that holds them back.

Question No. 12—Commerce and Consumer Affairs

12. to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs: What recent proposal has the Government announced regarding credit and debit card fees?

Christmas is off to a fabulous start for Kiwis: I’m pleased to say that surcharges are about to be “sleighed”. The Commerce Commission has today released a draft proposal to significantly lower card fees. The commission estimates that Kiwi businesses and consumers will save $260 million every year. Even a Christmas grinch can get excited about the level of savings.

SPEAKER: Yeah, well, I’m struggling.

James Meager: What are interchange fees, and how have they been wrapped up in higher costs for consumers?

Hon ANDREW BAYLY: Interchange fees are the fees businesses pay to accept Visa and Mastercard transactions. These fees are typically passed on to consumers through higher prices or surcharges.

James Meager: What is the Minister’s expectation for these “Christmas come early” proposals for consumers?

Hon ANDREW BAYLY: It does not take three wise men to know that the existing card fees are confusing and painful for customers. That’s why I’m thrilled that the Government is delivering a Christmas gift of good cheer and lower prices. I’ve expressed to the commission the urgency of this work. I expect the commission to have finalised the new caps for card fees by mid-2025 so it can be implemented soon thereafter.

James Meager: How will this proposal benefit Kiwis?

Hon ANDREW BAYLY: To put it simply, lower fees mean businesses will have reduced operating costs and consumers will get more jingle for their jangle. Mr Speaker, I wish you and the House a very merry Christmas and happy New Year.