Oral Questions

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

Yes.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Does he stand by his statement in May that “through careful economic management, we’ve turned a corner and the economy is back on track.” when the Government’s own figures show the economy has not only shrunk this year but growth is now expected to be lower than previously forecast?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I think, as the member may have digested with the Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update (HYEFU) published just shortly, certainly as commentators have said and I’ve said as well, HYEFU’s a bit more anchored in the past but there was some very good, positive economic news there. I mean, the fact that growth will be close to 3 percent, the fact that wages will be bigger than inflation, the fact that, actually, we’ve got low inflation and we’ve also got 270,000 new jobs being created—it’s pretty positive news.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: If the recovery’s really coming, why has the Government just lowered its growth forecast, compared to what it was telling New Zealanders earlier just this year?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, in answer to the first part of the question, I want to reassure the member that growth is coming because we’ve seen Westpac card spending up, we’ve actually seen ANZ business confidence at an 11-year high, we’ve seen consumer confidence coming forward, we’ve seen growth in a lot of sectors across the economy, and we’ve got housing affordability and confidence at a 15-year high with a net 28 percent of people feeling it’s a good time to buy a house. All of those things are positive signs. There will still be challenging data for us to navigate, but it’s more positive than negative.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Well, does he stand by his claim of careful economic management when his Government is forecast to keep spending more than it earns for the next five years and, in fact, the long-term forecast suggests there’s not a surplus in sight?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: That’s not correct. This is a big economy. As you saw in HYEFU, the numbers have moved from a small surplus to a small deficit. This is a Government still committed to delivering a surplus in 2028-29. But, again, I’d just say to the member, this is not someone I want to take lectures from, given $66 billion was spent during COVID, and no one knows where the hell it went; we had a tripling of our Government debt, and now we’re paying $9 billion to $10 billion in interest rate and we’ve got nothing to show for it. So the economic plan of spend more, tax more, borrow more—that’s not the way forward.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: What year will the New Zealand Government books, according to the operating balance before gains and losses (OBEGAL) measure, return to surplus?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: According to the operating balance before gains and losses, excluding ACC revenue and expenses measure (OBEGALx), it’s 2028-29. That’s our Government’s determination. But what you’re seeing from this Government is—

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker.

SPEAKER: Just a moment. Before you take that, there is still too much barracking across the House. It’s ridiculous.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Well, Mr Speaker, everyone was very silent for my question, but the Prime Minister must have misheard it—

SPEAKER: Well, I haven’t called you yet. A point of order—the Rt Hon Chris Hipkins.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: I asked the Prime Minister about the OBEGAL measure, not the made-up OBEGALx measure; the OBEGAL measure which every Government has been measured against. I asked him when that is due to be returning to surplus.

SPEAKER: Yeah, well, he did answer that question.

Hon Members: No, he didn’t.

SPEAKER: No, no; in your opinion he didn’t answer the question. It’s not my—

Hon Dr Megan Woods: He objectively didn’t—

SPEAKER: Sorry, have you got something to say, Dr Woods?

Hon Dr Megan Woods: No.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: How does borrowing more every single year square with his promise to get the books back under control?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, again, it’s a bit rich coming from that member who borrowed $120 billion more, made this Government pay out $9 billion worth of interest payment, and even still, publicly says he want to increase tax, he wants to increase spending, and he wants to increase borrowing.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Does he stand by his claim in May that unemployment has peaked and was starting to come down, when unemployment is now forecast to continue to rise even further?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, the way it works is you increase Government spending by 84 percent, you take inflation up to 7.5 percent, you have 12 interest rate rises, put an economy into recession, people lose their jobs. That’s the immutable laws of economics, and that’s what this Government’s working incredibly hard to do. We’ve got a grip on wasteful spending, we’ve got inflation down to 3 percent, we’ve had nine interest rate cuts, we’ve got growth coming into this economy; I think New Zealanders can feel it. The only member in this House who actually doesn’t want to see an economic recovery is the Leader of the Opposition.

Hon Nicola Willis: Can the Prime Minister confirm that the difficult choices his Government has taken to deliver an average of $11 billion worth of savings per annum means that both the deficit and debt are far healthier than would otherwise be the case, and that, in fact—

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Is this a question or a speech?

Hon Member: Speech.

Hon Nicola Willis: —the deficit would hit $25 billion this year—

SPEAKER: Hang on. Wait a minute. It doesn’t matter. I’m the one who decides whether it’s a question or a speech; not anyone from the cross benches, or whatever it is—the Opposition benches. Nicola Willis, start your question again with a little bit of brevity in the editing.

Hon Nicola Willis: Can the Prime Minister confirm that the significant savings delivered by his Government have reduced the size of the deficit and New Zealand’s debt beyond what would have otherwise been the case, such that, in the absence of those savings, the deficit would reach $25 billion a year, and debt would blow out to more than 50 percent?

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. First of all, those are completely made-up numbers by the Minister of Finance—

Hon Nicola Willis: No, they’re not. I’ve got the receipts.

Hon Chris Bishop: Got the receipts.

SPEAKER: There’s a point of order being taken, and if any people want to interrupt it, they’ll be leaving, which is probably not the right thing, because that’s the last thing the Opposition would want—so just a bit of respect all around. Start again with your point.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Well, first of all, they’re not numbers in the Government’s Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update; those are numbers that the Minister of Finance herself has made up. But second of all, it contains a number of assertions about actions of the previous Government and what the previous Government would have done if it had been re-elected, for which the current Prime Minister has absolutely no responsibility.

SPEAKER: No, that wasn’t the nature of the question—

Hon David Seymour: Speaking to the point of order, Mr Speaker.

SPEAKER: No, hang on—I’m just about to rule on it, so just give me a minute. The point I want to make is that the question sought an opinion—all questions, ultimately, seek an opinion. Now, if there’s debatable material in that, well, that’s debatable material. But I don’t think it’s reasonable to assume that that was, in any way, an attack on the previous Government.

Hon David Seymour: Before we go any further, I’d just ask your guidance: does it help the order of the House to have the Labour leader accusing other members of making things up?

SPEAKER: Well, possibly not, but then, what else do you say? Because there are other terms that might be used that are completely unacceptable, so I’m not going to pick up on that.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. It certainly does ask the Prime Minister for an opinion. It asks the Prime Minister for an opinion on actions that may or may not have been taken by the previous Government, had the previous Government been re-elected, and that is not something that the Prime Minister has responsibility for. He may have an opinion on it, but he does not have prime ministerial responsibility for it.

SPEAKER: With respect, the question asked what would have been the case if the Government had not made a significant amount of savings. Now, that’s talking about the current Government, not any other Government. I think the Prime Minister might very, very briefly answer that question.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Absolutely. Look, I want to thank the Minister of Finance because she has maintained very tight operating allowances. Actually, those operating allowances have been half the size of the previous administration’s. She’s worked incredibly hard to deliver $11 billion worth of annual savings, and, of course, the benefit of that is that we can actually employ 2,100 more nurses in our healthcare system, 600 more doctors, 900 more corrections officers.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Is it cheaper or more expensive now to make a Marmite sandwich than it was at the beginning of this year?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, the good news is that food inflation, as that member will have seen, has fallen to 4.4 percent today. It’s the third month in a row it’s come down, and it’s a hell of a lot lower than what it was—at 12.5 percent—under that Prime Minister.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker.

SPEAKER: Yes, just wait for the House to settle itself.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: I asked the Prime Minister a relatively straightforward question. He told parents across the country to go out and buy some butter, some Marmite, and bread and make a Marmite sandwich. I’ve asked him whether it’s more expensive or less expensive to do that now than when he gave parents that instruction. He hasn’t even addressed that question.

SPEAKER: Well, I don’t think it was an instruction, but he did address it by saying that food inflation is on the fall.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Is he not aware that the price of buying a loaf of bread is up 50 percent in just the last year, the price of a Marmite sandwich is significantly more expensive than it was when he told parents to go out and buy Marmite and bread and butter and make their kids a sandwich?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Oh, my goodness! Oh, my goodness! I love the way that the member has got an analysis on the cost of a Marmite sandwich but, actually, couldn’t work out where $66 billion that he spent during COVID went, couldn’t even be bothered to show up to a COVID inquiry, and thought that tripling the debt was a great way to secure New Zealand’s future. As I said, food inflation’s coming down, inflation’s coming down, interest rates are coming down. The good news is we’re getting more good-news data. That’s something to be celebrated. It’s been a tough time for Kiwis. I think the member should get in behind it.

Hon David Seymour: Supplementary.

SPEAKER: The honourable—

Hon David Seymour: David Seymour.

SPEAKER: I know your name—yeah, that bloke who just stood up.

Hon David Seymour: Ha! Thank you, Mr Speaker. Can the Prime Minister confirm that the Government’s Healthy School Lunches Programme is being done for half the price that it was done under the previous Government with the same return rate for the meals; and doesn’t it seem strange that Labour say they want cheaper food but when we give it to them, they don’t want that either?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I just want to commend the Minister on making sure we get great value for the spend that’s going on. That is a hallmark of this Government, because not only have we halved the price of a classroom so we can double the number of classrooms going out to our kids across this country—that’s because we’re just better at managing money than that side.

SPEAKER: The Speaker is not meant to enter into political debate and needs to be a bit careful about what’s said. But I can’t help, in this circumstance, in this Christmas season, to give a big shout-out to Coupland’s Bakeries—a great South Island institution; cheapest bread in the country by quite a long shot.

Hon David Seymour: Point of order. Aren’t you supposed to set aside all personal and private interests?

SPEAKER: I have no interest in that particular bakery other than the occasional step across the threshold.

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?]

Yes.

Chlöe Swarbrick: How is his year of growth going when data today shows that his economic strategy has produced the lowest growth in more than 10 years?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I’d just say, as we’ve seen with the Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update account, we’ve got growth close to 3 percent over the period. Most importantly, we’ve got wages growing faster than inflation. We’re certainly creating 270,000 new jobs over this period, and, at the end of the day, it’s a lot better than a wealth tax, a capital gains tax, an inheritance tax, a trust tax, a private jet tax—$88 billion worth of new taxes, and $44 billion worth of new borrowing.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does the Prime Minister consider his economic strategy a failure or a success, when unemployment is projected to continue to increase through next year under his plans?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, this is a Government that inherited a hell of a mess from the Labour-Greens Government and, as a result, we are turning the show around. It’s been fantastic to see consumer confidence returning, consumer spending returning, great growth in tourism, really strong performance in our export markets. We’ve got a lot of positive news to celebrate; the recovery is on its way, and now the great thing is how we shape that future.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does the Prime Minister consider his economic strategy, delivering construction sector activity at a six-year low and a loss of 16,000 jobs in just the past two years, a success or a failure?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, what I note this morning is that construction jobs being advertised are up, I think, over 20 percent, and that’s a good, positive move forward. I used to get asked a lot of questions by the Leader of the Opposition about construction and infrastructure, and building and construction; not so much now because, actually, as we’re bringing interest rates down, that creates opportunity for that sector.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does the Prime Minister see the connection, at all, between his economic strategy of cuts, setting the scene for high unemployment, and tax revenue being $1.1 billion lower than forecast?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, again, as I’ve said, what I see is a pattern of financial discipline. This is a Government that is saving $11 billion a year over this period. It’s a Government that’s working with operating allowances half of what the previous Labour-Greens Government worked with, and it’s a Government that’s taking a very balanced approach. We’re cutting waste in the system, we’ve moved $44 billion worth of savings in our first two years, and that’s enabled us to make investments in the front line, and we’re pretty proud about that.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does the Prime Minister consider his economic strategy, which is seeing 200 hard-working New Zealanders leave this country every single day, and the highest rates of unemployment since I was born, a failure worthy of abandoning for the good of hard-working New Zealanders?

Rt Hon Christopher Luxon: What I’d note is that it has been good and encouraging to see that, this month, we’ve had the lowest number of New Zealanders departing New Zealand. In fact, it’s been the lowest this month than it has in any given month of the previous Labour-Greens Government.

Hon Shane Jones: To the Prime Minister: perhaps the Prime Minister would like to explain to the Green member, when you’ve got a contractionary monetary policy and a need to shrink the size of the State after the COVID debt, it does take quite some time for the green shoots to sprout?

SPEAKER: He might like to explain but, you know, we’ve got a long day ahead.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: It’s a very good question.

Well, make it brief.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I think it’s a very good question and it’s an astute observation, but I’d just say—

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Point of order. Sir, you’ve made it extremely clear to the House, for a number of weeks, now, that there is an expectation that questions are questions, not opportunities to provide opinion, and even you can phrase a question to do that. Inviting the Minister to say whatever he wants is not complicit with your guidance to this House.

Yeah, that’s right. I forgot myself for a moment, so we’ll move on to Question No. 3—Cameron Brewer.

Question No. 3—Finance

3. to the Minister of Finance: What recent announcements has she made on the Budget?

Today, I released the Budget Policy Statement. At the same time, Treasury released its half-year update, which contains the latest set of economic and fiscal forecasts. The Budget Policy Statement confirmed that the operating allowance for Budget 2026—that is the amount of net new operating funding for discretionary policy initiatives—will remain at $2.4 billion a year. This is a very tight allowance. For comparison, in the 2022 Budget, under the previous Government, net new operating spending was $9.7 billion a year—four times as much as we’ve set for next year’s Budget.

Cameron Brewer: What are the Government’s priorities for the Budget?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: The Budget Policy Statement says that health, education, defence, and law and order will be priorities in next year’s Budget. At the same time, the Government is committed to keeping tight control of discretionary spending; that means savings and reprioritisation will be a prominent feature of the Budget, as they have been in previous years. Last year’s Budget contained savings and revenue-raising initiatives of $5.9 billion a year; this year’s Budget added savings of another $5.3 billion a year. These total savings of more than $11 billion each year mean that we have been able to invest in front-line public services and also get the books in better shape.

Cameron Brewer: What do Treasury’s forecasts show?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Treasury’s forecasts show economic growth strengthening over the next year and beyond, and they show the unemployment rate falling. As the economy picks up, so does tax revenue, and, at the same time, the Government continues to take a very disciplined approach to spending. As a result, the Government’s headline operating balance measure, OBEGALx, returns to surplus, and net core Crown debt as a percentage of GDP bends from going up to going down. Both the economic outlook and the fiscal outlook are very positive.

Cameron Brewer: How do the forecasts compare to those in the Budget update earlier this year?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Forecasts are revised at every update, and this is no exception. The economic recovery is now expected to be slightly slower and slightly weaker, at least initially, than was forecast in the Budget update. That means tax revenue is expected to be a little lower and expenses a little higher across the forecast period. As a result, OBEGALx is now expected to reach surplus in the 2029/30 year—although, by that stage of the forecast period, we are talking about very small differences between very large forecasts for revenue and expenses. Small changes are not the issue; what is the issue, however, is the path back to surplus. That does count, and there is a clear path in the forecasts towards returning to surplus and bending the debt curve. However, getting there cannot be taken for granted; it will require ongoing discipline and commitment to the savings our Government has delivered.

Question No. 4—Finance

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

Yes, within context.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Who is right: the Prime Minister, who said in question time today that her Government will be in surplus by the 2028-29 year, or the Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update released today, that shows surplus under her measure of operating balance before gains and losses excluding ACC (OBEGALx) won’t be until the 2029-30 year?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Well, Detective Edmonds is on the job. Actually, what the half-year update shows is that, at this stage, there is forecast to be a small deficit in the 2028-29 year. However, the Prime Minister is 100 percent correct that our Government, with its fiscal discipline, is targeting a surplus in 2028-29. Getting there will require ongoing fiscal discipline.

SPEAKER: The opening comment of that answer was not acceptable. We will continue because it’s an Opposition question, but there may be a cost further down the track.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: How can she maintain any credibility as finance Minister now that she has pushed out surplus by more than three years from when she first promised it?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Because, unlike the finance Minister who preceded me, I have kept to extremely tight operating allowances—in fact, reducing operating allowances in this year’s Budget and delivering below the operating allowance that was forecast; because I, together with this team of Cabinet Ministers, have delivered $43 billion worth of average savings, which has taken discipline and difficult choices; because I remain committed to the pathway to surplus and debt reduction and the responsible economic management that requires. This distinguishes me from just about every single member on the opposite side of the House.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: When she said in September 2024 that “the economy will start to grow again”, why is GDP almost unchanged since then and Treasury have revised down their forecasts?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Well, we will get the GDP update on Thursday. What market economists are saying is that they predict that growth in the third quarter of this year was between half a percent and a full percent. They also predict that growth will accelerate in this fourth quarter that we’re currently in, meaning that growth for the calendar year is up.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Why, then, does GDP in the Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update show that for the 2025 fiscal year, it is at minus 0.6, but GDP during the Budget Economic and Fiscal Update was minus 0.3 percent?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Pretty simple. There’s a difference between a fiscal year and a calendar year.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Supplementary. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: A question’s being asked.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: What is she most proud of: pushing surplus out by three years, unemployment being revised upwards, or shrinking the economy by 1.1 percent in the last year?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: I’m proud of the fact that our Government delivered households with children, on average, $78 additional per fortnight thanks to tax relief; that around 1.9 million households received, on average, $60 per fortnight; that around 3.5 million New Zealanders received $32 per fortnight; that while delivering this tax reduction, we delivered significant savings; that we’ve been more disciplined than the last lot; and that we can show a path to a return to surplus and debt reduction, accelerating growth, 270,000 jobs being created over the next few years, low, stable inflation, low interest rates, and an economy managed by a Government committed to addressing the underlying barriers to growth. The prescription we are following is working. We compare well with our international peers, with a steeper path back to surplus and a more prudent debt position. The biggest risk to this economy is the election of a Labour-led Government.

Question No. 5—Transport

5. to the Minister of Transport: What recent milestones have been achieved in the introduction of roadside drug testing?

Yesterday, I was thrilled to announce that the new screening devices for drug-drivers have been rolled out. [Holds up screening device] They look like this. Drug-impaired drivers should expect consequences. The introduction of roadside drug-testing is a big step forward for road safety. It was great to be out with the police and the Minister of Police, Mark Mitchell. We saw the first couple of random roadside drug tests. I’m told that in Victoria, unfortunately, the first time they rolled it out, someone got a positive test. I’m pleased to say, at least, that at 2.30 p.m. on Jervois Quay, there were no initial positive tests, but it was great to see the hard-working police operationalising this new practice.

Tim Costley: How will these tests work?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Members may—unless they’ve blotted it out of their minds, and I can understand why—remember the old COVID tests. They look very similar to the COVID tests. At the roadside, a driver swipes the device on their tongue—I won’t do it for the House, but they collect saliva from the tongue. The screening device allows police to screen the saliva for four drugs: cannabis, MDMA, methamphetamine, and cocaine. If the test is positive, a saliva sample is collected and sent to the lab for analysis, where it’s tested for 25 impairing substances. Drivers receive an infringement penalty following a positive lab test result. A driver who tests positive at the roadside is required to take a second screening test—one of these. [Holds up screening device] Two positive tests result in the driver being prohibited from driving for 12 hours, to address any immediate safety risk.

Tim Costley: What are the consequences of driving whilst under the influence of drugs?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: People who get behind the wheel on drugs put themselves and others at serious risk of death or serious injury. Around 30 percent of road deaths now involve an impairing drug. If a drug is detected, drivers face a $200 fine and 50 demerit points; two or more drugs, it’s a $400 fine and 75 demerit points. Drivers who refuse or fail to comply with the roadside drug tests are issued a $400 infringement and 75 demerit points, and are prohibited from driving for 12 hours.

Question No. 6—Health

6. to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by his statement that “I welcome Health New Zealand’s decision to offer 1,400 hospital-based roles to the 2025 end-of-year cohort of nursing graduates, which means more than 80 percent of those who pass their exams are expected to secure positions”; if not, why not?

Yes, in the context it was made. Health New Zealand has confirmed that around 1,800 graduate registered nurses will begin hospital-based roles this year, including around 1,400 positions being offered to the 2025 end-of-year cohort of nursing graduates. This means that 80 percent of those who have graduated as a registered nurse are expected to secure positions. This is all part of our Government’s focus on strengthening the front line, putting patients first, and building on the thousands of additional nurses that have been employed at Health New Zealand since 2023.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Why does he stand by that description, when less than half of year-end graduates have been offered a job in the last round?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: The statement that I made was that Health New Zealand would be offering 1,400 positions to the 2025 end-of-year cohort of nursing graduates. This would mean that 80 percent of those who graduated as registered nurses are expected to secure positions, and, as the Health New Zealand PR said, those confirmations would be sent out over a period of time.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Why didn’t his statement reflect that 600 of the jobs won’t be recruited until the middle of next year, leaving many nurses languishing in a pool of the unemployed?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: As with previous Advanced Choice of Employment (ACE) programmes, these roles are phased in over a period of time. That has been the practice over a period of time.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Was it misleading to imply that 1,800 jobs are enough, when the total number of graduates each year is 2,500?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: As I said, 80 percent of those who have graduated will be offered roles through the ACE programme. The Government has also provided funding to primary care to assist them with incentivised payments to recruit graduate roles into primary care as well. We’ve provided funding through Budget 2025, with funding to support primary care to employ graduate nurses. I’m not sure if the member also realises, but the ACE programme is also available to other entities such as private hospitals and other organisations who also employ graduate nurses. There are other entities which also employ nurses in this country, who are also employing graduate nurses. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: Just wait. Sorry.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Why would anyone believe his numbers when nursing grads are being offered 0.6 fulltime-equivalent (FTE) roles, to conceal the growing scandal of nurses who are unemployed?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, that is completely incorrect. These jobs are being offered at what is the standard rate, which is what they have been offered over a large number of years, which is a 0.8 FTE role. That is standard practice for ACE graduates for their first year into Health New Zealand. I refer the member to previous answers, I believe, to written questions which show that, I think, there may have been one nurse who may have been offered 0.6, once, because that was what worked for that nurse.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Why won’t he just offer these nurses a job? Goodness knows our health system needs them!

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, we are offering them jobs because our health system needs them. We have already hired around 2,000 additional nurses into Health New Zealand since we came to Government. We’re employing more nurses at Health New Zealand than ever before—more doctors at Health New Zealand than ever before. We are investing in the front line more than ever before. We are delivering more than ever before. The member opposite might like to try to paint a picture, which is completely inaccurate, and the only person who doesn’t want the health system to succeed, it appears, is Dr Ayesha Verrall.

SPEAKER: No, that’s enough. Do you have another supplementary? Does the member have another supplementary? She has one available if she wants it.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Will the Minister—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Questions are heard in silence, and we’ll keep on questioning until there is silence and Ministers are able to answer without the assistance of their Government colleagues.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Is it correct that nurses are being offered 0.6 fulltime-equivalent positions in the latest round of graduate recruitment?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: The 1,800 roles that this question is about are being offered at 0.8.

Question No. 7—Immigration

7. to the Minister of Immigration: What recent announcements has she made regarding visa-waiver travel?

Recently, the Minister for Tourism and Hospitality and I announced that visitors from China and the Pacific would be able to travel from Australia to New Zealand without requiring a New Zealand visa. That enables more holidaymakers to factor New Zealand into their trips, provided they have an Australian visa. They can apply to travel here and it’s just a hop across the Tasman to see our stunning landscape and unique, world-class experiences.

Rima Nakhle: How much interest has there been?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: Just six weeks ago, the visa-waiver travel from Australia came into effect. Already, we’ve had a fantastic response. Since 3 November, there have been almost 26,000 requests for an NZeTA—or a New Zealand Electronic Travel Authority—and over 15,000 visitors have already travelled here. That adds to the roughly 240,000 visitors each year from China and the Pacific, providing a significant boost already. Tourism is our second-largest export, with good reason. People around the world would jump at the chance to holiday in New Zealand, and we’re committed to supporting our tourism industry and businesses around the country who are enabling significant visitor number boosts.

Rima Nakhle: Why was this change enacted?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: Well, it’s because this Government remains committed to growing the economy. This change will help boost the number of tourists and visitors coming into New Zealand, supporting our regions and local businesses. The change also makes it a less costly and far simpler, faster process to travel here for a short holiday. Overseas tourists remain a key driver of regional growth, and we remain fully committed to supporting our regions to thrive.

Question No. 8—Prime Minister

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

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

Yes.

Hon Marama Davidson: Is the Citizens Advice Bureau correct in its recent report that found Government policies, including benefit sanctions, more restrictive emergency housing criteria, and cuts to community services, are exacerbating hardship across the country?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I haven’t seen that report, but what I can inform the member and assure the member is that with this Government not wasting spending, getting inflation down, and getting interest rates down, it’s actually helping people.

Hon Marama Davidson: Does he accept the Salvation Army’s findings from their homelessness briefing that increasing numbers of people in hardship are in paid work yet are still unable to afford necessities like housing, kai, bills, and healthcare?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I haven’t seen the report, but as the member would be well aware, in the previous Labour-Greens Government, we saw a 37 percent increase in homelessness despite spending a billion dollars. Homelessness is a difficult and complex issue, and that’s why I am proud of the six-point plan that the Minister for Auckland and other agencies announced recently.

Hon Marama Davidson: What is his response—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Sorry—start again.

Hon Marama Davidson: What is his response to the Zero Hunger Collective’s report that “whānau resort to Afterpay schemes for everyday expenses, such as gas and groceries, and face impossible choices around which bills or debts to ignore” and “the cuts to funding for community food organisations and budget advisory services noted in 2024 have seen front-line support agencies close once they exhausted their funding reserves”?

SPEAKER: Sorry, what was the question?

Hon Marama Davidson: What’s his response to the quotes?

SPEAKER: Be brief.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I haven’t seen the report.

Hon Marama Davidson: What does it say about his Government’s priorities when wealth at the top continues to grow while more whānau are lining up for food parcels, more rangatahi are living without shelter, and more people are without a job?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, on the last part of that question, we’re very proud of our progress on housing. This is a Government where you haven’t seen a 30 percent increase in house prices; you’ve seen a drop in rents. As a result, housing affordability is the best it has been in a decade. The second thing I’d say is that under the previous administration, there was a big run-up and a quadrupling of people, actually, for a social housing place, and we’ve actually moved back 5,000 people off that list already in two short years. That record of quadrupling was something not to be very proud about. We’ve got rid of emergency housing, and that means we’ve got people into proper, dry homes, and as you’ve seen, we’ve got efforts going into homelessness, with respect to Housing First places, extra money being made available for rough sleepers, and ensuring that the Ministry of Social Development exercises good discretion.

SPEAKER: A little bit of calm to my left would be very helpful, mainly to the people who are making the interjections.

Hon Marama Davidson: At what point will he accept that rising hardship is not a coincidence but a consequence of his Government’s decisions?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I reject that outright. This is a Government that has lowered inflation from 7.3 percent to 3 percent. It’s a Government that has lowered interest rates nine times after they were increased 12 times. It is a Government that is now putting this economy on a pathway to growth, and that puts more money into every New Zealander’s pocket, and that’s what it’s about.

Question No. 9—Local Government

9. to the Minister of Local Government: Does he stand by his claim that the Local Water Done Well model will mean cost increases would be more affordable for ratepayers, given councils’ final plans show nearly $9 billion more in water spending than previously forecast?

Yes, I do. Under previous long-term plans, councils were not required to ensure capital investment was sufficient, and now they are, which means capital expenditure is higher than previous long-term plans had forecast. This investment shows that councils recognise that after decades of under-investment, water projects can’t wait any longer. Making investments now is how we ensure cost increases are affordable.

Tangi Utikere: How can he maintain that his water scheme improves affordability when councils’ final plans show total water investment rising by nearly $9 billion, costs that he has acknowledged rise directly from his own Government’s model?

Hon SIMON WATTS: Well, something that I think all sides of this House would agree on is that water has been under-invested in for multiple years. There isn’t a magic money tree which means water services can be properly invested in with no cost. No matter what model you adopt, there is always going to be a need for more money to be spent. I remember the days of that member’s party talking about the billions of dollars—$200 billion of investment needed—and how ironic that they are now complaining about investment needing to be made.

Tangi Utikere: How does he expect ratepayers to bear costs under Local Water Done Well given that councils can only fund these higher capital costs through rates, debt, or cuts to existing services?

Hon SIMON WATTS: Well, unlike the failed Labour model of Local Water Done Well, it has the backing of councils—

SPEAKER: No.

Hon SIMON WATTS: —and their communities, and we’ve empowered them.

SPEAKER: Talk about your own ministry and your own responses; no one else’s. Question time is not an opportunity for political reflection; it’s for answers.

Hon SIMON WATTS: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. Local Water Done Well has the backing of councils and their communities, and we’ve empowered them to establish the structures that work best for them. All councils now have water service delivery plans. They have been independently assessed, and they show and give ratepayers confidence that they are more reliable in financial water services than the status quo.

Tangi Utikere: Isn’t it the case that his scheme doesn’t lower costs but shifts responsibility for funding on to councils, meaning ratepayers should expect to carry those higher costs?

Hon SIMON WATTS: No, and I won’t take lectures—

SPEAKER: Sorry, just while I’m being pedantic about it, to say “Is it not”—shouldn’t it just be “Is it the case”? We’ll do it again. We’ll do it properly.

Tangi Utikere: Is it the case that his scheme doesn’t lower costs but shifts responsibility for funding on to councils, meaning ratepayers should expect to carry the higher costs?

Hon SIMON WATTS: No. Our model ensures that the water assets are and remain within local ownership and control, and that those communities have the responsibility and the support to support their councils to implement the investment required in these assets. That is a critical aspect that is going to need to continue, and we’ve set in place a model that will allow it.

Tangi Utikere: When will he accept that it is his Government’s scheme that will add unavoidable pressure to the cost of living crisis that households are already struggling with right now?

Hon SIMON WATTS: Well, I’m not going to take a lecture from that member, who had reforms that were going to strip communities of their assets. That is a—

SPEAKER: Hold on. Wait. How do you answer a question by saying you’re not going to take a lecture? It wasn’t a lecture; it’s a question, so just answer the question.

Hon SIMON WATTS: The point of the question was comparing to a status quo which doesn’t exist, so I’m simply pointing out that point.

SPEAKER: Well, there’s your answer. Thanks very much.

Question No. 10—Agriculture

10. to the Minister of Agriculture: What recent reports has he seen on the forecast for New Zealand’s food and fibre exports?

Today, along with Ministers Jones, Hoggard, Patterson, and Grigg, I released the Situation and Outlook for Primary Industries report, which shows that the innovation and hard work of our world-leading farmers, growers, foresters, and fishers is paying off. Today’s report shows that New Zealand’s high-quality and sustainable food and fibre exports are forecast to hit a record $62 billion by 30 June 2026, climbing to $63 billion the following year. With these results, the food and fibre sector now accounts for 83 percent of all New Zealand’s goods exports, and I’m proud of the hard-working men and women of provincial New Zealand, who are delivering world-class products to the world.

Suze Redmayne: What is contributing to this growth in export revenue?

Hon TODD McCLAY: Well, the main drivers of this record $62 billion worth of exports are the meat and wool sector, forecast to reach $13.2 billion for the first time ever; horticulture forecast to reach $9.2 billion, and, in particular, kiwifruit exports will reach a record $4.3 billion worth of exports next year; forestry is expected to grow to $6.3 billion, with processed timber exports up 28 percent to $1.2 billion for the first time; and dairy exports are expected to $27.4 billion—

Hon Damien O’Connor: What about wool?

Hon TODD McCLAY: —showing that New Zealand dairy farmers are the powerhouse of the New Zealand economy. For the member interjecting, I’ll speak more slowly, meat and wool—meat and wool—are forecast to reach $13.2 billion for the first time ever. This is an outstanding result, especially viewing challenging global conditions and extreme weather that have affected farmers and growers.

Suze Redmayne: What actions has this Government taken to support the growth of food and fibre exports?

Hon TODD McCLAY: We’re fixing rules so they’re not costly and so that farmers can work with them. We’re doing trade deals and we’re doing trade missions around the world—17 trade missions around the world in this term of Government so far. We’re cutting red tape through significant reforms such as the overhaul of the Resource Management Act (RMA)—the replacement of the RMA—improving freshwater farm plans, and limiting and reducing farm-to-forest conversions. The Government wants our farmers, growers, foresters, and fishers out there on the land and in the oceans, doing what they do best, which is innovating, farming, and catching fish.

Suze Redmayne: What does this mean for New Zealand’s economy?

Hon TODD McCLAY: It’s very, very good news for the New Zealand economy. One in seven people work in food and fibre, and one in four Kiwi jobs depends on trade, so the success of the food and fibre sector means thriving communities, increased export revenue, a growing economy, a prosperous New Zealand, and a Government that doesn’t have to raise taxes to pay for all of the things that New Zealanders demand and deserve. Farmers’ contributions not only needs recognition but they also need celebration, because those hard-working men and women are helping to grow the economy, and, much more than that, it provides a resource and income for every single household and family in the country. Creating jobs creates livelihood, and that’s why this Government across the board—the three parties—is proud to back our farmers and growers, and we thank them for their hard work.

Question No. 11—Finance

11. to the Associate Minister of Finance: What recent changes has he made regarding overseas investment?

I thank the member for his question. In recent times, the Government has made a number of changes to make it easier for New Zealanders to bring money and know-how into the country from overseas. Those changes have focused the screening of overseas investment applications on threats to national security and public order, in order that it is simpler and faster for investment to be consented. The result is that, over the last two years, we’ve gone from taking an average of 71 days to consent an overseas investment application to only 28 days.

Todd Stephenson: How will these changes to the Overseas Investment Act increase investment in New Zealand?

Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: When a business has the option of getting investors and their know-how from overseas, they’re able to offer higher-paying, more interesting jobs. I’ll just give one example. I visited two businesses in the same industry on the same afternoon. I don’t want to denigrate either of them, but the one that had had the advantage of a larger, more sophisticated company overseas investing in it had a lot more technology, slicker marketing, more know-how, and it had a product it could sell for more and pay more wages. That’s what overseas investment is really about. It’s about money and know-how so people get better-paying, more interesting jobs.

Todd Stephenson: Why does New Zealand need more international investment?

Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: It’s a shame, but our productivity growth—that is, the amount that workers are able to produce in a day of work—has lagged behind the countries we used to like comparing ourselves with. There’s a clear relationship where productivity growth has lagged as investment has lagged. That’s why it’s so critical we make it easier to get that money and know-how brought into the country, in order that New Zealanders can go to work, produce more, and take home more money, being paid more.

Todd Stephenson: In addition to productivity, how does overseas investment help address low wages?

Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: There’s an old saying that productivity is not everything, but in the long run, it is almost everything. We have not rested on the progress that we have made so far. Last week, this Parliament passed an Overseas Investment Act amendment bill, which will bring a new fast track for overseas investment that does not threaten national interest or public order, that does not affect a sensitive area, such as farmland, forestry, fishing quota, or residential housing. On that fast track, we will be processing overseas investment consents in 15 days. This is a country that is serious about doing business with the world. We started at 71 days; we got it down to 28 days for a consent. We will now get it down to 15 days, with a target of 80 percent of consents being issued within five days of application. New Zealand is open to doing business with our friends around the world.