Oral Questions

1. to the Associate Minister for the Environment: What announcements has he made recently regarding reducing the regulatory burden on primary industries?

[Associate Minister Hoggard wearing an eye patch] Ahoy, Mr Speaker. [Interruption] Thank you, Mr Speaker. With my two-eyed colleagues, the Minister of Agriculture and the Minister Responsible for RMA Reform, I announce that the Government will introduce legislation to remove the low-slope map from stock exclusion regulations, and repeal winter grazing regulations. These targeted changes are part of an important part of the coalition’s commitment to allow farmers to get back to farming without unnecessary red tape. We’re working hard on better ways for farmers to manage environmental impacts through freshwater farm plans.

Mark Cameron: How will these proposed changes help farmers?

Hon ANDREW HOGGARD: For stock exclusion, the existing rules have a map that identifies low-slope land where beef cattle and deer will have to be fenced off from water bodies. This low-slope map has proven problematic, creates a huge expense for some farmers with minimal practical or environmental benefits. This is why we are removing it. We’re also proposing to remove the conditions for winter grazing and regulation, while still requiring practical steps to be taken to minimise effects on fresh water. There has already been significant improvement in winter grazing and practice supported by sector groups and local councils.

Mark Cameron: What is the Minister working on to let farmers get back to farming productively and sustainably?

Hon ANDREW HOGGARD: As a priority, we’re working on improvements to freshwater farm plans to make them less costly and complex for farmers. We know farm plans are a good idea—they allow farmers to find the right solutions for their farm and their catchment—but they don’t need to be as onerous as the system that was introduced by the previous Government. That’s why we will shift to an approach that matches risk with cost.

Mark Cameron: How does this align with the proposed changes to stock exclusion and winter grazing?

Hon ANDREW HOGGARD: We are working on an enduring and robust farm plan system that councils and communities can rely on, where practical, on-farm solutions can stand as an alternative for a range of local rules and consents. This will help avoid the need for blunt, national regulations. I believe that good quality farm plans that don’t cost the earth can be a practical solution for identifying and managing a range of environmental impacts.

Hon Damien O’Connor: Has the Minister read the New Zealand-EU free-trade agreement (FTA) that includes legally binding provisions to “provide for a high-level of environmental protection and continue to improve environmental protections” and “not to weaken, reduce, waive, or otherwise derogate from environmental laws to encourage trade or investment”; if so, what does he think?

Hon ANDREW HOGGARD: Well, I have read the New Zealand-EU FTA, and what I would say is that I had a really great presentation last week showing the difference in water quality between New Zealand and the EU, which showed we are miles ahead of many areas in our water quality than the EU.

Question No. 2—Prime Minister

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

Yes, I do, and especially our announcement of a $1.9 billion investment in Corrections in Budget 2024 so that we can keep New Zealanders safe and we can restore law and order. Budget 2024 will invest an 810-bed extension at Waikeria Prison, it’ll deliver 685 new front-line stuff, it will increase pay for staff, and it will extend rehabilitation programmes for prisoners. This comes alongside our wider plan to restore law and order, which is about backing police to go after criminal gangs, getting more officers on the beat, speeding up court processes, restoring three-strikes legislation, establishing youth military academies and a youth serious offender category, and capping sentence reductions. We are going to be restoring law and order, unlike this last Government, and we’re going to get New Zealand back on track.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Was he aware before his press conference yesterday that the $1.9 billion he was announcing for Waikeria Prison included both operational and capital spending; if so, why did he say at the press conference that it was all operating expenditure?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: As I said to you, I’m very proud of the $1.9 billion investment we announced yesterday. As I said, we had a bit of a mix-up in communication yesterday—we clarified it very quickly and, importantly, we are adding another 810 beds to Waikeria Prison, we are making sure we have almost 700 new corrections front-line staff, they’ll be paid well, and we’re making sure that we can actually get tough on law and order.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: How much of the $1.9 billion announced yesterday is capital expenditure, and how much is operating expenditure?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Again, in that Budget, there is enough to be able to do capital expenditure for expanding the budget for the prison. Importantly, there is operating expenditure to make sure that we can pay our staff and hire more corrections officers.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. The question was pretty straightforward: how much of it was capital spend and how much was operating expenditure? The Prime Minister indicated in his answer to the previous question that he did know the difference between the two and he did know what it was—I’m asking him what it was.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I’ll just say to that member: he well knows it’s about Budget sensitivity. He’ll find out on 30 May.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Is the announcement that he made yesterday Budget sensitive; if so, why has he announced it?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: The other thing I would add to the member is that, as I said yesterday, there is commercial sensitivity about two elements of that budget. One is around Waikeria Prison and the build and construction costs, and the second piece is around the labour negotiations for staff pay increases.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: How is revealing the—

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Point of order, Mr Speaker. My former colleague Steve Maharey wrote a very good article the other day, and I suggest that we all read it again because I agree with him. My point is that when you’ve had your first five questions, it goes to the other side well before that. That was the old rule; it should be the rule now.

SPEAKER: Yeah, well, everything moves on—as you know.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: What is commercially sensitive about releasing the breakdown of capital and operating expenditure from yesterday’s announcement?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: What I said to the member is what is commercially sensitive is the build and the extension of Waikeria Prison.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.

SPEAKER: No problem.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Can I ask the Prime Minister as to whether the new 800 extra prison beds announced yesterday means that the old fishing policy of “catch and release” is over?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, absolutely. What is over is actually a Government that has been soft on crime. We have a Government that is going to make sure we restore law and order.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Several things, Mr Speaker, but the first is the point of order that Winston Peters raised before was completely out of order—I’m surprised that you didn’t chastise him for that. But the second is that that question is also completely out of order—[Interruption] The question that he’s asked is also completely out of order. It certainly wouldn’t be able to be authenticated.

SPEAKER: Well, I’m surprised that you are surprised, and surprised further that you thought in even raising the surprise that you have was a point of order. But in the end, we do try to keep things flowing as much as we possibly can and I don’t want to do anything that disrupts from the members’ intense questioning of the Government.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: What will the annual operating cost of housing 810 additional prisoners be, and was that cost included in the $1.9 billion that he announced yesterday?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Look, I just think it’s quite outrageous this member is talking about law and order. Remember what happened in the last Government: 51 percent growth in gangs, 33 percent growth in violent crime, quadrupling of ram raids, doubling of retail crime. You had six years to fix it—you didn’t do a thing.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I wonder whether you’ll allow me to repeat the question, seeing as I think the Prime Minister might have missed what the question actually was.

SPEAKER: Well, one of the interesting things I note is that when the person answering the question answers, it’s quite audible on the coverage that goes out. But it was not audible when the Prime Minister was answering because of the noise that was coming largely from the member’s colleagues. So, by all means, ask it again and we’ll hear the answer in silence.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: What will the additional annual operating cost of housing 810 additional prisoners be, and was that cost included in the $1.9 billion that he announced yesterday?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Yes, and what I’d say to you is we have a package to support Corrections to make sure that we restore law and order in this country. We are not going to tolerate rising crime like we saw under your previous administration.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does the Prime Minister agree with National Party leader Christopher Luxon, who during the 2023 election said that New Zealanders who take MDMA are not criminals?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Again, what I’d say to you: we are focused on making sure we restore law and order in this country. We have a series of policies to do that. We are making sure that we are going to get tough on law and order, we’ve got three-strikes legislation coming back, we’ve got gang law going through this House, we’re making sure that we’re going after serious young offending.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Point of order, Mr Speaker. That didn’t even come close to addressing the question, which is about whether there should be criminalisation applied to New Zealanders who are consuming illicit substances.

SPEAKER: No, no. With respect, that was not the question. The question was: did he agree with a statement made by a person who was not a Minister at the time—and therefore it almost didn’t stand.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Does he consider people who answer 111 calls to be front-line staff?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Again, it’s about making sure that we can deliver for New Zealanders and improve crime outcomes. We want to see lower levels of crime in this country. We’re making sure that all of our agencies are focused on 20,000 less violent criminals in this country; we want to see a 15 percent reduction in serious young offending. We’re focused on the outcomes: we’ll get organised to make sure we deliver those outcomes.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. The Government have made a distinction between front-line staff and back-office staff, and have said they won’t be cutting any front-line staff. The question that I asked him is pretty straightforward: whether he regards 111 call centre operators as front-line staff. He didn’t even address or even come anywhere near the question.

SPEAKER: Well, I think he came very, very, very near the question. But the point is—I just point out that it’s not reasonable to use the point of order process to try and extract an answer that is suitable or acceptable to the person asking the question. But in this case, I will ask the Prime Minister to make another attempt at that question.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I expect there will be sufficient resources to man a 111 line.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Does he consider the people who man the 111 line to be front-line staff?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Again, that’ll be a decision ultimately operationally for the CEOs to make. But what I make sure is that we’ll have front-line services protected.

Question No. 3—Finance

3. to the Minister of Finance: Has she seen any recent reports on the economy?

Yes. Every two years, the OECD reports on the economic situation and policies of each member country. The latest report on New Zealand was released yesterday. As well as the usual commentary on economic and fiscal policy, the report looks at three structural issues: competition policy, climate change, and improving educational performance in schools. I would encourage members to read the report. It is particularly good in describing what has happened in the economy over recent years, and it brings cross-country expertise to important policy areas.

Suze Redmayne: What does the OECD say about New Zealand’s fiscal situation?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: The OECD report talks a lot about the current fiscal position and how this has come about. It says—and I quote—“The pandemic and spending overruns led to a permanent increase in the government spending to GDP ratio, resulting in a substantial deterioration of New Zealand’s fiscal position.” It says that public debt is rising, Government spending has been higher than planned, and that the discretionary increase in spending in the 2023 Budget “worked against monetary policy efforts to reduce inflation.”

Suze Redmayne: Does the OECD describe how those overruns happened?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Yes. The OECD report says that expenditure slippage, to use the OECD term, arose in two main ways: first, from 2021 onwards the Government set relatively high operating allowances in advance of its Budgets, and, second, when it came to the Budget itself, the actual amount of spending was higher still. This is borne out by the relevant Budget documents. For example, the operating allowance for Budget 2023 was originally set at $2.6 billion, then was successively raised to $2.7 billion, $4 billion, and, finally, $4.5 billion. The actual new spending in Budget 2023 was $4.8 billion. That is how spending overruns happen.

Suze Redmayne: What is the OECD’s advice on addressing these fiscal issues?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: The OECD says—and I quote again—“It is important that the Government continues to steadily reduce the fiscal deficit as planned, to limit the rise in public debt and thereby increase the fiscal buffer available for the next negative shock.” [Interruption] Members are clearly very interested in this, so they should listen up: “On the revenue side, any tax cuts should be fully funded by offsetting revenue or expenditure measures.” We’ve not shared any details of the Budget with the OECD, but it is safe to say that after 30 May, they will find that the Budget is entirely consistent with this advice.

Question No. 4—Prime Minister

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

Yes, and especially last week’s announcement that beginning in term 1, 2025, all State schools will be teaching reading using the proven structured literacy approach. Currently, only 56 percent of our year 8 students are at the expected level for reading and writing, and that is unacceptable—all part of our plan to improve educational outcomes so young Kiwis gain the skills that they need to succeed.

Hon Marama Davidson: Does he agree with the New Zealand Law Society that his Government’s fast-track bill “Creates a potential for decision making that is not objective or independent … and … a risk that the Joint Ministers will be … subjected to lobbying or other attempts to influence their decision making.”?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Look, as you well know, the Minister for Infrastructure has said this—it’s through a select committee process, open for any sensible ideas to improve the legislation, but, again, we are going to build things in this country.

Hon Marama Davidson: Does he agree with submitters such as the New Zealand Planning Institute, which said the current fast-track legislation “risks overloading the system and slowing it down, contrary to the intent of creating a fast process.”?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: No, the complete opposite is going to happen. We are going to speed up the building of infrastructure in this country, and I seriously hope that I get the support of the Greens for this legislation, because if you want serious delivery on our climate change goals, we need to build renewable energy projects much faster. Faster consenting—the better that is for everybody.

Hon Marama Davidson: Is he concerned that by failing to put a list of projects approved for fast tracking at select committee, his Government is not being transparent or democratic domestically, let alone upholding the commitments and international agreements to promote transparency in Government decision-making?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, that’s a very long question from that member, but what I would say is that the legislation is before a select committee, and, importantly, as you’ve heard from the Minister, he’s very comfortable with taking on feedback from that process.

Hon Marama Davidson: Is he concerned that seven out of eight regional councils who submitted on the bill oppose it in its current form?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: No; we are going to build things in this country. We have to get things done. It does not need to take eight years to consent an onshore wind farm in this country. It can take one year. We can build it in two and we can get the climate change benefits of it. That’s why I look forward to that member’s support, as the leader of the Green Party, to support this legislation.

Hon Marama Davidson: Will the Prime Minister allow public scrutiny of the list of projects intended for fast tracking at select committee, given the multitude of concerns raised about environmental protections, lack of transparency, executive oversight, free-trade agreements, and the 27,000 submissions on the bill?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, this legislation, as I’ve been explaining to the member, is about accelerating towards our climate change goals and commitments. This is enabling us to build more renewable energy. That surely is a good thing. That is what I would expect that member to be supporting.

Question No. 5—Local Government

5. to the Minister of Local Government: What recent announcements has he made about a financially sustainable model for water in Auckland?

On Sunday, I joined Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Auckland Mayor Wayne Brown to announce that the Government has delivered on our election promise to provide a financially sustainable water services model for Auckland under our Local Water Done Well plan. Our plan was unanimously endorsed by Auckland Council’s governing body, and Watercare’s more financially sustainable model will ensure water rates for Aucklanders remain affordable, both now and into the future.

Dan Bidois: What do these changes mean for Auckland ratepayers?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, good news. Under the Local Water Done Well solution we announced on Sunday, Aucklanders will avoid the 25.8 percent water rate hike previously proposed by Watercare; $1.2 billion was spent over the last six years by the last Government on water reform, which took away local control and was divisive. But in six months, our Government has avoided these significant water rate increases.

Dan Bidois: How does this fit into the Government’s plan to keep water assets in local control?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, good news. Our Government recognises the importance of local decision-making and local ownership of water infrastructure. As part of our 100-day plan, we scrapped three waters, to restore council ownership and council control of water assets. And in six months, we have delivered our first Local Water Done Well deal: a sustainable financial model for Auckland that will keep water assets in local control.

Dan Bidois: What reports has he seen on water reform in Auckland?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, I’ve seen reports that over the last six years, $1.2 billion was spent on water reform plans that would take away control of water assets from local councils. Some said that our Government’s Local Water Done Well plan would not work, but in just six months we have delivered a financially sustainable water services model for Auckland, and we spent only $300,000 on that.

Question No. 6—Finance

6. to the Minister of Finance: Does she stand by her statement that “tax reductions will be funded by reprioritisations, savings, and new revenue measures”, and is she committed to delivering meaningful tax cuts as outlined in the National–ACT and National–New Zealand First coalition agreements?

Yes and yes. The fact that tax reductions will be funded by reprioritisations, savings, and new revenue measures means that tax relief in the Budget will be fiscally neutral. The Government has decided to reprioritise lower-impact spending to give a modest amount of tax relief to people and families who have been paying more and more of their wages in tax over the last 14 years. Our tax package will be responsible. I look forward to when that member explains to working people why they should be yet again denied the opportunity to keep more of their own hard-earned money.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: What national assets, if any, will she sell to pay for the tax cuts?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: None.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Can she commit to no changes to the Government contribution to KiwiSaver to pay for her tax cuts?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Yes.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Is she committed to the changes to the independent earner tax credit that is outlined in the coalition agreements for Budget 2024?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Well, now we’re getting exciting questions, because the member clearly wants to know the detail of the tax relief that we will be delivering on Budget day. I’m sad to say that, just like everyone else, she will have to wait until 30 May, and gosh, it’s going to be good.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Can the average earner expect to be $50 better off, as per the coalition agreements, or $10 to $20 per week better off, as announced by David Seymour last week in the media?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Only 22 sleeps to go. I tell this to every worker listening to question time today: you will get precisely zero dollars of tax relief from a Labour-led Government, and from our Government you’ll be getting a lot, lot more than that.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Is it responsible fiscal management to continue with her tax cuts when her Budget Policy Statement shows that tax revenue will be down $13.9 billion over the forecast period, and she has confirmed she will be borrowing for everyday costs; if so, which economists support her tax cuts in the current economic climate?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: In answer to the first part of the question, yes, and what a mess we have been left. I will just invite the member opposite to consider the counterfactual. So if the counterfactual was to have a $3.5 billion operating allowance and spend it, as was her party’s stated alternative, then our Budget package, including tax relief for working people, requires less borrowing.

Question No. 7—Education

My question is to the Minister of Education—[Interruption from gallery]

Just wait. Grant McCallum.

7. to the Minister of Education: What recent announcements has she made about improving the way New Zealand children learn to read?

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Last week, I announced that beginning in term 1, 2025 all children in State primary schools will learn to read using structured literacy approaches. Structured literacy gives children the foundational skills they need to master reading, starting with sounds and phonics to decode words, and is fundamentally based on explicit teaching material with a clear sequence. We are putting $67 million from Budget 2024 in to ensure that teachers are supported by this approach and schools have the resources and supports they need to transform how our kids are learning to read, both in English and te reo Māori. This announcement, together with the cell phone ban and the “hour a day” policy, is just the start of our plan to put achievement back at the heart of our education system so our kids get a world-leading education.

Grant McCallum: What feedback has she seen about this announcement?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: I’ve received strong support—overwhelmingly strong support—from the sector. From a board chairman: “I love your enthusiasm for proper, structured learning and especially for doing something decent and long term to fix the atrocious state of reading and writing.” From a principal: “Great news. From a secondary perspective, I’m very excited about this change and look forward to seeing the results coming through in a few years to us.” From a junior school team leader: “Thank you so much for your strong statement on structured literacy. This would have to be the best news I’ve ever heard in my 20-year-long career to date. Follow the neuroscience, not the theories. I’m so pleased that a Government is finally putting their foot down and standing by what works for all children.”

Grant McCallum: What evidence does she have to support the need for structured literacy in New Zealand schools?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: Just yesterday, the OECD Economic Survey of New Zealand 2024 made recommendations for a clearer curriculum—something I’m pleased to say this Government is already actioning. It also makes the following statement: “Teachers are overly reliant on Reading Recovery that fails to improve learning outcomes for a significant minority of children”, and recommends that the Government “Continue to expand support to alternative interventions … including structured literacy …”. This is a Government of action. Funding for reading recovery will be repurposed directly into the front line, resourcing schools to provide small-group and one-on-one structured approaches to literacy, so our structured literacy approach will be consistently delivered.

Grant McCallum: Why is change urgently needed to transform the way New Zealand children learn to read?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: Recent data shows that just 56 percent of year 8 students are at the expected level for reading, and 35 percent for writing. The recent OECD report stated that an important reason for turning around a trend decline in New Zealand school education performance—including in literacy and numeracy, and increasing education outcomes—is that it is key to ensuring the future performance of the economy and the wellbeing of all New Zealanders. I could not agree more. This Government has set an ambitious target to get at least 80 percent of year 8 students to curriculum by 2030. Learning to read will ensure our children can achieve success in education and life. Teaching using structured literacy approaches are a critical part of how we get there.

SPEAKER: Question No. 8 in the name of Debbie Ngarewa-Packer.

Hon ERICA STANFORD: Come on! Ask a supp, Jan.

Hon Jan Tinetti: Oh, it’s coming.

Hang on a minute. Sorry. Just wait a minute. That member needs to remember that we don’t talk while someone else is asking a question—something I thought a schoolteacher might know a lot about.

Question No. 8—Prime Minister

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

Yes, in the context they were given.

Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: What assurances can he give to iwi like Ngāti Toa Rangatira, whose stream and harbour have been poisoned by raw sewage waste as a result of unrestrained development, that fast-track legislation will not lead to a repeat of this situation as they’re experiencing in their rohe?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, as I’ve answered before, the legislation is before a select committee and submissions are being taken. The Minister for Infrastructure is open for any considerations that come through that process, but we are going to get things built in this country.

Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: What qualifies a fast-track project as having significant regional or national benefits, and how are these economic benefits weighted against environmental costs?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, again, what I’d say to the member is, as she well knows, the legislation is before a select committee. It is being worked through. We’re opening it up to public submissions, but we are going to make sure that we balance economic considerations, environmental considerations, social considerations. But we are going to get things built.

Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: What diplomatic pressure will he apply to Israel after their refusal to accept terms of a ceasefire today and their continued attack on the civilians at Rafah?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, again, we’ve been very strident in our urging that we do not want Israel moving into Rafah. What we have seen today is something that we do not support. But what I’d say is that we have a moment in time to make sure that Hamas and Israel get round a table and actually put peace in this process.

Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Will he support the United Nations’ call for an independent international investigation into the mass graves containing hundreds of bodies at two hospitals in Gaza, which show evidence of the mass execution and torture of Palestinian civilians?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Again, what we want is a focus in the world for Hamas to release hostages. We want Israel to give unimpeded access for humanitarian assistance, and we want both parties to get round the table so that a peace process can commence, because military action isn’t going to solve anything.

Hon David Parker: Did I hear the Prime Minister correctly, saying that he thinks that Israel should be negotiating with Hamas rather than Palestine?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: What I said was it’s important that both parties get round the table, put themselves into the peace process, and actually resolve this thing diplomatically. That’s the only way it’s going to get resolved.

The honourable—

Hon Members: Rawiri Waititi.

SPEAKER: Rawiri Waititi.

Rawiri Waititi: You are definitely not only a Speaker but a prophet.

SPEAKER: I’m also forgetful.

Rawiri Waititi: How will the addition of 110 new prison beds impact Māori, given that Māori are 37 percent of the people proceeded against by Police, 45 percent of the people convicted, and 52 percent of the people in prison?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: What I’d just say to that member is there are 450 beds in that prison at Waikeria today, there are 600 that will come on-stream next year, and there are a further 810 beds to be added under the announcement from yesterday that will lead to over 1,800 beds at Waikeria Prison. We are determined, in this country, to make sure that we are going to lower crime. It is unacceptable, and I don’t care which ethnicity you’re from; if you want to commit a crime, you will actually do the time.

Rawiri Waititi: What measures are being taken to ensure that the increased capacity will not lead to overcrowding or compromise the wellbeing of inmates?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, under the previous administration, the only goal on law and order was a reduction in the prison population. We are focused on reducing crime—violent crime, retail crime, ram raids, serious crime. That’s what we’re focused on. And as a result, we will continue to expand prison capacity if we need it, but at this point in time, our focus is on making sure we expand that capacity, add more corrections front-line service officers, and make sure that we actually support and get law and order restored in this country.

Hon David Seymour: Can the Prime Minister confirm that, regrettably, Māori are more often victims of crime and, unlike this line of questioning he’s just been addressing, our coalition Government is focused on the Māori victims of crime before we worry about the welfare of criminals, and, actually, that goes to people of all ethnic backgrounds?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I couldn’t agree further. The reality is that Māori are disproportionately victims of crime. That is why we are lowering crime rates in this country. That’s what we are obsessed about. That’s what we’re going to do so that people feel safe, whether they’re Māori or non-Māori. That’s important.

Rawiri Waititi: Who are the most incarcerated peoples here in Aotearoa?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Māori are sadly overrepresented in the prison population, but they’re also overrepresented as victims of crime too.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Isn’t it a fact that half of the people who claim to be Māori in prison are less than half Māori?

We’ll move on to question No. 9.

Question No. 9—Police

9. to the Minister of Police: Does he stand by all his statements and actions?

Yes.

Hon Ginny Andersen: Does he stand by his statement, “This Government is determined to put public safety back at the heart of the criminal justice system.”; if so, has the number of victimisations from incidents using a stabbing or cutting weapon in the Auckland City Police District increased by 32 percent since he has taken office?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Absolutely we stand by that statement, because we’ve come off the back of six years of a soft-on-crime Government and we’re having to fix and repair the enormous amount of damage that they did. In terms of the Auckland CBD, we have increased by over 50 percent the amount of beat patrols and foot patrols now. There are early signs that crime in the Auckland CBD is starting to reduce, and we’re going to continue to be focused on this work.

Hon Ginny Andersen: Are the number of victimisations from incidents involving a stabbing or cutting weapon in the Waitematā Police District up by 25 percent since he took office?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Well, again, I’d say that this Government inherited a situation where we’ve got massive violent crime that we’re now having to get on top of and start to reduce. When it comes to knife crime, I have spoken to police, and I’ve asked for advice on that because we’ve seen in the UK a massive increase in knife crime. We’re now seeing in Australia an increased use of knife crime, and this is probably going to arrive on our shores too, and this Government’s going to get ahead of the problem and make sure that we actually deal with it.

Hon Ginny Andersen: Does he agree with the Prime Minister that it is for the chief executive or the Commissioner of Police to determine if police communicators who answer 111 calls are front-line or not?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Yes, I do agree with the Prime Minister because just about every day he’s committed to making sure that we’ve got a safer country and that we’re moving in the right direction. In terms of 111 operators, I would define a front-line police officer, myself, as a sworn police officer, and I would say that the 111 operator’s job is no less important in terms of public safety. But it is there to support those front-line police officers in their job.

Hon Ginny Andersen: Mr Speaker, I’m not clear—

SPEAKER: Why are you talking?

Hon Ginny Andersen: Point of order. Mr Speaker, he said he agreed with the Prime Minister that it’s for the chief executive or the Commissioner of Police to determine. But then he gave his own reckons that it was actually a sworn officer. So I’m unclear as to what was the answer to my question.

SPEAKER: Yeah, but I’m not. So next question?

Hon Ginny Andersen: Does he stand by his answer to written parliamentary question No. 8217 that in fact police communicators who answer 111 calls are not front-line?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Well, again, I would say that my determination is I view a front-line police officer as a sworn member of police, and I view the incredibly important job that communicators and 111 call takers do as being critically important, but they are there to support our sworn front-line police officers.

Question No. 10—Prime Minister

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

Yes, and especially our announcement on the weekend which will save Aucklanders, including those in that member’s electorate, from a predicted rates increase of 26 percent. We promised to repeal and replace Labour’s disastrous three waters model, and we are. The previous Government’s divisive, ineffective approach wasted $1.2 billion and achieved absolutely nothing. In just six months, we’ve delivered for Auckland and Aucklanders. Local Water Done Well’s going to deliver better water services.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does he agree with the OECD’s findings, some of which his Minister of Finance was just referring to, that, I quote, “New Zealand’s tax settings remain an outlier internationally.”, and that shares, land, and owner-occupied residential property are tax favoured?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: What I would say is that I agree with some of what the OECD says; I disagree with other things that they say.

Chlöe Swarbrick: What did the OECD get wrong, then, with their analysis that New Zealand’s tax settings remain an outlier internationally and that shares, land, and owner-occupied residential property are tax favoured?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: What I would say is what they got right is that we need to invest more in education; we need to invest more in competition and deregulation; and we need to make sure that we’re investing in science, technology, innovation, and international trade and investment.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does the Prime Minister agree that our tax settings incentivise property speculation and disincentivise productivity, or does he disagree with the Treasury, the IMF, the OECD, and pretty much every credible economist in the country?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Look, what I agree with is that low and middle income working New Zealanders—the very people that the Labour Party and the Green Party used to profess they cared about—actually deserve tax relief. It’s been 14 long years; there’s been a 40 percent growth in inflation. They’re going to get it at this Budget.

Chlöe Swarbrick: What does he say to those low and middle income earners who can see in this OECD report that shares, land, and owner-occupied residential property are tax favoured under his Government’s tax settings?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Again, as I said, we are not supporting a capital gains tax; that is period. We’re not doing that.

Question No. 11—Corrections

11. to the Minister of Corrections: What recent announcements has he made about investment in Corrections?

Yesterday I announced—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Just hang on—wait. Just let him at least start the answer before the barracking begins.

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Yesterday I announced a key part of this Government’s plan to crack down on crime and restore law and order. Alongside the Prime Minister, I announced $1.9 billion of investment in Corrections to meet their workforce requirements for a growing prison population as well as capital investment to build a new 810-bed facility at Waikeria Prison. The funding will meet the current shortfall left by the previous Government, which has meant that Corrections is housing an additional 1,100 prisoners on top of what they’re budgeted for. Not only are we meeting the shortfall, we are funding headroom on top of that. It means that Corrections will be staffed to house 10,000 prisoners at any given time. It gives the system capacity to take violent repeat offenders off the street. The new build at Waikeria will comprise three units, with an additional 810 beds. This is on top of the 500 beds opening in the middle of next year. This announcement will take Waikeria’s total capacity when complete to 1,865 prisoners, making it New Zealand’s largest prison. The previous Government had a target to empty prisons. No Government wants to see a skyrocketing prison population—

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Point of order. Speakers’ rulings are pretty clear that Ministers shouldn’t really go on once they’ve answered the question. This was answered—the question—a long time ago. And also, now we’re straying into areas that you yourself have warned Ministers about, it’s one thing to make factual statements; it’s another thing to make political statements. I asked for a point of order immediately upon that Minister making political, not factual, definitely debatable, statements.

SPEAKER: Yes, that’s right. You raise an interesting question, actually, because it is my personal view that some of these questions here today could have been answered with the word “yes”, and then there would be no supplementaries to follow. But I haven’t ruled that way. I would say, can I just ask the Minister to leave out political references that are attacks on the Opposition and speak factually about the matters that he’s been asked to speak on.

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Can I just seek your guidance on one point. The fact is that the previous Government’s only target set for public safety was a reduction of the prison muster by 30 percent. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: Just a minute. We’re dealing with a point of order, so please stay quiet. That might be the Minister’s view, but it’s probably not the public record. So there are other ways to make that statement, and I think it would be more reasonable for the Minister to try and do that. But that answer was extremely long—informative, but long. So can we have another question on that, James Meager?

James Meager: Has he considered the need for rehabilitation of our prisoners?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: I have. As part of this announcement, we’ve announced a total of $78 million for Corrections’ rehabilitation programmes. This will deliver fulltime-equivalent resources to rehab services, physical spaces for the rehab to occur, and additional staffing to ensure our prisoners get the rehabilitation services they need to return to society. Since becoming Minister, I’ve asked Corrections to refocus rehabilitation services on practical skills—helping to develop practical skills like driving and trades.

Mariameno Kapa-Kingi: Mōrena. Are the additional 810 new prison beds part of this Government’s approach to Māori housing?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Well, this Government has clearly said that we’re putting public safety at the heart of what we’re doing. That means that we anticipate that there probably will be an increase in numbers coming into our corrections system, and that’s why we made this announcement around capacity. But what we really want to see is a reduction in that prison muster as we start to get control of the crime in our country.

SPEAKER: Can I just remind the House that when it comes to asking questions, ironic expressions are not acceptable. I didn’t pull the member up—

Rawiri Waititi: Tag and release.

SPEAKER: I beg your pardon?

Rawiri Waititi: Tag and release.

SPEAKER: Now hang on, are you going to take a point of order?

Rawiri Waititi: Point of order, Mr Speaker. The expression was also used in this House that I believe fits in the same explanation that you’ve just used—the catchphrase “tag and release”, and there was no—

Rt Hon Winston Peters: No, catch and release—catch and release; listen up.

Rawiri Waititi: No, I’m not talking to you. Catch and release. I think that’s unacceptable also, but it was never pulled up.

SPEAKER: Yeah, partly I didn’t hear it because of other noise in the House, but I think—

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Catch and release, I said.

SPEAKER: Just a minute.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: It’s on the Hansard; they know it.

SPEAKER: Yeah, I’m trying to deal with this. Just everyone calm down. All I’m saying is that, in general, the Standing Orders are pretty clear about what can be in a question and what can’t be. They are equally clear on what can be in an answer and can’t be, but everyone accepts that there is a degree of leniency for the sake of flow in the House. I’m just making that point today so that we don’t get into that day after day after day.

James Meager: Will this announcement increase the number of corrections officers across the network?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Yes, it absolutely will. We’re funding an additional 685 front-line jobs. This includes 470 corrections officers, increasing both staff and prisoner safety. It will also meet the remuneration requirements that came out of the collective negotiations with the union at the end of last year, as well as funding for future negotiations. This announcement is forward-looking, future-proofing the corrections system’s capacity, meeting the needs of our front-line staff, and making sure that they have the numbers they need to keep people safe.

James Meager: How was this level of spending made possible?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: That’s a great question, because if this was the previous Government, they would have taxed or borrowed this funding—

SPEAKER: No, we’ll stop there—we’ll stop right there. Thanks very much.

Question No. 12—Corrections

12. to the Minister of Corrections: Does he agree with the Prime Minister that corrections funding announced yesterday was all operating allowance and not capital funding; if so, does he stand by all of his own statements yesterday?

I stand by the statements that—it was a significant announcement that we made yesterday, and it was of a $1.9 billion investment in capital and—

Hon Member: It was beyond you.

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Well, if you give me a second, I will answer it. You seem very excited and keen to hear the answer; why don’t you just let me say it? So the $1.9 billion investment was in capital and operating expenditure for a corrections system that has received very little focus or attention from the previous Government, whose only public safety target was to reduce the prison muster by 30 percent—

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. The claim that the Minister keeps repeating—as a Minister—is wrong in fact and could only be interpreted as deliberately misleading the House.

SPEAKER: Look, to be honest with you, I didn’t hear it said. There was a lot of noise coming from over here; I missed it.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Well, he said it multiple times—that there was only one target of the previous Government. Anyone picking up the Estimates documents will see that there are dozens of targets for Vote Corrections and that the claim the Minister is making is not true.

SPEAKER: And I’d ask the Minister to therefore refrain from making that statement.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. In fact, he needs to correct it—he has given misleading and incorrect information to the House repeatedly.

SPEAKER: Sorry, no, you can’t ask for that. In the end, it is a political exchange in here, and that is part of that. I can only adjudge the reasonableness of anyone’s statements. But it would be unreasonable for me to say that because the Opposition says you’re wrong, you must apologise or withdraw from it—that wouldn’t be the way the place works. Can I please—

Dr Tracey McLellan: Supplementary.

SPEAKER: Tracey McLellan.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Hold on—he hasn’t answered yet.

Dr Tracey McLellan: What proportion of the funding announced—

Hon Kieran McAnulty: On notice.

SPEAKER: Wait on. Sorry—you’re probably right, actually. I’ve pulled you up too quick. So the Hon Kieran McAnulty is providing able assistance—thank you very much. Mark Mitchell, do you want to answer that primary question without the political inferences—the primary question.

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Well, I’ve answered the substantive part of the question.

SPEAKER: Well, have another go.

Dr Tracey McLellan: Everyone’s confused.

SPEAKER: No, no, no; everyone’s—no, no. Hang on. Wait on. Can I just say—hold on.

Hon MARK MITCHELL: I stand by the significant announcement that we made yesterday of a $1.9 billion investment in capital and operating expenditure for a corrections system that has received very little focus or attention from the previous Government.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Point of order. Mr Speaker, this was a question on notice. There is a higher standard required for those questions. The Minister has not answered or addressed the first part of this question.

SPEAKER: Well, I think he has, so much as the previous question of a similar nature, asked by the Leader of the Opposition, got the answer from the Prime Minister, which said that those matters are subject to the Budget. While the quantum might well be out there, the split of that will clearly be announced when the Budget’s announced. So I don’t think it’s an unreasonable answer from the Minister.

Dr Tracey McLellan: What proportion of the funding announced is capital expenditure, and what proportion is operating expenditure?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Well, like the Prime Minister said, the capital expenditure currently will not be disclosed because there are current negotiations, sensitive negotiations—

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: He doesn’t know.

Hon MARK MITCHELL: —going on by Corrections in terms of the delivery of Waikeria Prison. It is completely commercially sensitive. And the Leader of the Opposition—it just goes to show just how little he knows in terms of being able to deliver Government—

SPEAKER: No, no—no, no, no. Sit down! Sit down! No, the member will—

Dr Tracey McLellan: What proportion, therefore, of the $1.9 billion of funding he announced yesterday is from the operating allowance?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Well, I’ve been very clear about—the piece that we can talk directly to is the $78 million that we’re putting into rehabilitation programmes for prisoners on remand. Anything to do with pay negotiations or commercial negotiations around capital projects on Waikeria is sensitive.

Dr Tracey McLellan: When will the Waikeria upgrades he announced yesterday be delivered?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Well, we’ve said that the first 500 will be delivered in the middle of next year. Then, the additional 810 will be delivered towards the end of 2028.

Hon Chris Bishop: Can the Minister confirm that the fiscal approach of the previous Government when it came to corrections funding was to believe that all the money came from Treasure Island?

SPEAKER: No, no—no; sit down. I’ve got to say—just a minute. I’m going to call the Hon Nicole McKee, but, I’ve got to say, those sort of questions don’t help the order of the House, at all.

Hon Nicole McKee: To the Minister: does he agree that a well-funded corrections system is essential in supporting this Government’s new and improved three-strikes law, which will take serious violent and sexual offenders off our streets and keep New Zealanders safe?

SPEAKER: Yeah, I tell you what, you can have a brief response. But the question itself—

Hon Member: It’s got nothing to do with the primary question.

SPEAKER: —is not anything to do with the primary, and so a brief response and then we’re over.

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Yes, absolutely, I agree with the member. Investing in the capacity and the welfare of the staff in our corrections service is completely aligned with what the three-strikes legislation is intending to do—

SPEAKER: Good—that’s excellent. That was a great answer—I meant only a great answer in its brevity.

Dr Tracey McLellan: How much of the $442 million in operational savings is coming from scrapping programmes, and how many of these programmes are in place to keep corrections staff safe?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Well, the first thing I’d say is that one of my priorities as the incoming Minister was to make sure that we started to reduce the amount of assaults on our corrections officers—

Hon Dr Megan Woods: Answer the question.

Hon MARK MITCHELL: —who deserve—well, part of the question was around the safety of our corrections officers, so I’m going to answer that. You opened the door, so I’ll answer. One of my priorities as the incoming Minister was around corrections officer safety, because we’ve seen an alarming rise, under the previous Government, of assaults on our corrections officers. The good news is that assaults on corrections officers are starting to reduce. In terms of programmes, that is an operational decision for Corrections. But what I’d say to the members is that while we’ve got people inside the corrections system, we’re going to deliver programmes that give them meaningful life skills that give them the best shot of rejoining society and making a go of it.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr. Speaker. The member asking the question asked him whether any programmes that focused on the operational safety of corrections staff were being reduced. The overall thrust of the Minister’s answer, when you get down to it, was that it’s an operational matter for Corrections. That simply cannot be allowed to stand as an answer in this House. Ministers are accountable for operational matters to the House. It’s well-codified in Speakers’ rulings and in the Standing Orders that you cannot give that as an answer to the House. You might be able to give that as an answer outside the House, but when it comes to operational matters, it is the Minister that is accountable to the House for those issues.

SPEAKER: Yeah, but I have heard numerous times in this House Ministers say, “That is an operational matter for which I don’t have direct responsibility.” So it’s kind of one of those areas that I think you could take two different positions on. But I will ask the Hon Mark Mitchell to perhaps answer the question again.

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Well, what I’d say is that my main priority is the safety of our corrections officers. And so my expectation in corrections is that they enhance programmes and improve programmes to make sure that our corrections officers are safer.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Still no answer.

SPEAKER: So as—well, just before we finish, the member can sit there and say that there was still no answer, but when the Minister says his “expectation is”, that is exactly the relationship between a Minister and a chief executive, as the Prime Minister—and the former Prime Minister—well knows.