Oral Questions

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

Yes.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Has he or any Government Minister requested or received advice on limiting the right to strike for any Government workforces; if so, what was the nature of that advice?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: We respect the unions’ right to strike. We also encourage them to think about the impact they’re having on kids, parents, and patients.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I asked the Prime Minister whether or not he or any of his Ministers had requested or received advice on limiting the right to strike.

SPEAKER: The Prime Minister might like to make a further comment.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Not that I’m aware of.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: So why did Simeon Brown say that limiting the right of doctors to strike was something that the Government would consider?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: He talked about the fact that, actually, we want doctors to consider the rights of parents, patients, and kids. He said that, ultimately, we need to balance the right to strike and actually make sure we protect the interests of other New Zealanders. That is something that he said we may ultimately consider, but I’d just say to that member and to all your friends in the unions to encourage them to get back around the bargaining table. Let’s negotiate tomorrow.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: So how is it in the interests—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Just wait for your own team to—

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: How is it in the interests of parents, patients, and kids for the Government to offer public sector workers like teachers, doctors, nurses, and others pay increases that are less than the rate of inflation—and so amount to a real-terms pay cut—and not address the workload issues that they have been raising?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, that’s just not true. What we have said is that we expect teachers to be able to come around the bargaining table and negotiate with their employer, the Public Service Commissioner, and actually do the negotiation there. But, again, there are offers that have been extended to the unions that haven’t been taken out to members. Asking teachers to consider whether they could do their professional development and their teacher-only days in one of the 12 weeks of school holidays is not an unreasonable request—and having a discussion about a Palestinian State from a teachers’ union is not a priority about improving attendance or education outcomes for New Zealanders.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Why didn’t the Government increase eligibility for the game development rebate, given the current $40 million budget for the rebate isn’t being fully utilised?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, again, I’m very proud of the progress that’s been made in the gaming sector under this Government. When I looked at the numbers a few months ago, and don’t hold me to account, but the 38 percent increase in the size of the gaming sector—I think it actually hit something like $780 million in the last year, which is fantastic.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Why isn’t he aware that the gaming sector has grown 86 percent in the last 2½ years, since the gaming rebate was introduced by the previous Labour Government, and that his Government, despite repeated requests from the sector, has not been willing to expand eligibility so that the budget that was set aside for it actually gets spent?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Isn’t it great? We’re getting a question on the third Labour policy of this week, but we didn’t get one for the one and two, and this is really the big deal that’s going to move the needle for Labour! I’d just say that getting in behind and backing fast track, public-private partnerships, roads of national significance, NCEA changes—those are things that we want to hear from the Leader of the Opposition on.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Can he name one other sector of the New Zealand economy that’s grown by 86 percent in the last 2½ years, and, if he can’t, why isn’t he willing to back the sector that is?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: We are backing the sector. That’s why it’s so great to see the growth that’s taking place in the sector, but it’s also why we’re backing farmers because, actually, dairy is up 14 percent, red meat is up about 9 percent, and horticulture is up 19 percent. Those are fantastic results—record results—in our primary industry sectors, and, again, I just encourage the member to support what the Government is doing to free and liberate our farmers, who are treated as villains and are deeply, deeply valued.

Hon Dr Shane Reti: Is the Prime Minister aware of the recent gaming sector review where some businesses saw “increasing the number of grants available through CODE as the most effective lever for further development”?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Yes, I am, and I appreciate the work that the member is doing to actually improve our science sector and to actually encourage more start-ups across a range of technology sectors in this economy.

Question No. 2—Finance

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

This morning, the New Zealand Superannuation Fund published its latest annual report. It shows that the Superannuation Fund’s total size was $85 billion at 30 June 2025, with an average return since its inception of 10.1 percent per annum.

Cameron Brewer: How does the Superannuation Fund compare to other Government-owned investment funds?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Different countries’ funds have their own approach to investment. There are a number of common practices. These funds and their investment companies, typically, buy and sell a range of assets; diversify their portfolio, including by investing internationally; seek to generate strong long-term financial returns for their investor base; actively manage risk; and reinvest their profits to ensure fund growth and sustainability over time.

Cameron Brewer: Does the Superannuation Fund sell assets, and do other Government-owned investment funds sell assets?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Yes, and yes. Funds sell assets and they buy other assets. For example, just to take a random example, when Temasek was established in Singapore in 1974, its initial portfolio of $354 million Singaporean comprised shares in companies, start-ups, and joint ventures previously held by the Singapore Government. This included, I’m advised, a bird park, a hotel, a detergent producer, a start-up airline, and an iron and steel mill. Of the 35 companies in Temasek’s initial portfolio, only 10 still remain, directly or indirectly. That means that less than 30 percent of their original seed assets are retained by them today.

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: What aren’t they talking about their own policies?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: I’m talking about Temasek policy. The other 70 percent have been divested or liquidated as Temasek invested, divested, and grew their portfolio to $434 billion Singaporean.

Cameron Brewer: Do Government-owned investment funds typically invest in other countries?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Yes, because they’re trying to diversify and get as good a return as possible for the citizens they represent. Let me again refer to just a random example: Temasek. Around half of their portfolio consists of companies and assets outside of Singapore. In fact, their sovereign wealth fund, GIC, invests in more than 40 countries worldwide. As literate investors know, diversification across countries and industries is essential to reduce risk and protect portfolios from market volatility.

Question No. 3—Finance

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

Yes, including the comments I’ve just made about Temasek.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: How can she stand by her statement that “Costs are under control, and inflation is under control” when there have been four consecutive increases in inflation?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Well, inflation is within the target band. Three years ago, it was 7.3 percent; it is now 3 percent. I would put our record of inflation up against that member’s any day of the week.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Is a pay offer below the 3 percent rate of inflation an effective pay cut; if not, why not?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Well, it’s not for me to get into the bargaining between the unions and the Public Service Commission.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: How does a pay offer for teachers, firefighters, and nurses that does not keep up with the cost of living help their families, who are struggling with the increasing cost of living?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: The Government has made generous offers in relation to all of the pay disputes that are currently under way. The other point that I would make is that—as that member’s party and other members have been making repeatedly and, in fact, allied with the unions—it is not just about pay. One of the issues that has been raised repeatedly over many years in relation to education, for example, is the extra investment required for learning support. The Government has come to the table and put a record investment in Budget 2025 of over $700 million. To quote the union’s own words, this is not just about pay, and we agree.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Does she agree with the Prime Minister that “We would love to pay everyone more, but for that to happen, we’ve got to be a much wealthier economy.”; if so, would there have been more money for workers had she not handed out pay increases for board directors, $2.9 billion for landlords, and $300 million for the tobacco industry? [Interruption]

SPEAKER: OK—sorry, that’s just ridiculous. If you didn’t like the question being asked from your side of the House, talk to the member away from the general furore of the House. When someone is about to answer a question, hold your tongue until they’ve at least said one or two words.

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: To take each of the three stupid assertions in that question in reverse order: the tobacco claim by the member is inaccurate and wrong; in relation to the board directors, if the last Government had not appointed boards that ran so many Crown companies—like, to take a random example, Kāinga Ora—so badly, we would not have been put in a position where we had to bring in some commercial expertise to get the books back on track; and, in relation to the first part of the question, I always agree with the Prime Minister.

Question No. 4—Transport

4. to the Minister of Transport: What announcements has he made on the Government’s Roads of National Significance programme?

Well, as I outlined to the House yesterday—

SPEAKER: The Hon Chris Bishop.

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: My apologies, Mr Speaker. As I outlined to the House yesterday, the Government is spending $1.2 billion to move the next tranche of the roads of national significance to the next phase of development, following the board’s approval of the investment cases. This is about a long-term transport infrastructure pipeline to help address our infrastructure deficit, and, of course, the infrastructure that will be built over time supports growth and creates jobs and opportunities for Kiwis. It was a fantastic day on Monday.

Rima Nakhle: What did the most recent investment cases say about roads of national significance in the central and upper North Island?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: I invite members to go away and read the investment cases. To take a couple of examples, the Northland Expressway’s investment case proves the project will be transformational for the North in the same way that the Waikato Expressway has been transformational for the Waikato. The first section is currently in procurement, and, ultimately, if the project is built completely between Auckland and Whangārei, it will reduce travel times by 38 minutes and, of course, reduce deaths and serious injury—which is something that many members are concerned about—by 66 percent. The East West Link is a very important project that I think some members have been familiar with for quite some time, and the Hamilton Southern Links project will unlock over 17,000 new houses and, it’s estimated, over 7,000 new jobs in this extremely fast-growing area of the upper North Island.

Rima Nakhle: What did the most recent investment cases say about roads of national significance in the lower North Island?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: It was good to see the New Zealand Transport Agency board endorse investment cases for Petone to Grenada and the Cross Valley Link, as well as the State Highway 1 Wellington improvements. Petone to Grenda is a critical resilience project for the Wellington region. It will take 6,500 vehicles off the most congested section of State Highways 1 and 2 and will reduce travel times between Lower Hutt and Porirua by 23 minutes at peak time. After the previous Government did not advance the case for Let’s Get Wellington Moving, we are committed to delivering meaningful improvements to State Highway 1 through Wellington, including a second Mount Victoria tunnel, a second Terrace tunnel, three-laning Vivian Street—so you can no longer park on State Highway 1—Basin Reserve grade separation, and widening Ruahine Street and Wellington Road.

Rima Nakhle: What did the most recent investment cases say about the roads of national significance in the South Island?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: It’s good to see that the New Zealand Transport Agency board endorsed the investment case into the Hope Bypass—which we may have to rename. State Highway 6 is a vital connection for people and goods. It will boost economic growth in Nelson-Tasman and reduce peak journey times through Richmond by at least 10 minutes by 2034. Of course, developments continue on the Belfast to Pegasus and Woodend Bypass road of national significance, with a fast-track application being worked through currently, and, of course, I cannot let the moment go without mentioning James Meager’s favourite project: the second Ashburton Bridge.

Question No. 5—Education

5. to the Minister of Education: Will she be present at education sector strike protests on 23 October; if not, why not?

Tomorrow, I will be in Wellington, and I do understand that all rallies, planned events, and sign-waving events have been called off due to severe weather in Wellington.

Hon Willow-Jean Prime: Why have over 40,000 educators been forced to take to the streets just to get their Minister to listen to their concerns?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: Well, they’re not forced to do anything, and I would like to just say that we have been listening to them, which is why we have delivered the biggest investment in learning support in a generation—more than those members did in the last six years combined. That is why we have invested in paying for their teacher registration fees, why we’ve invested in an aspiring principal programme, and why we’ve invested in a teacher bonding scheme, among many, many things we’ve done to back the sector. But we cannot get further progress unless the unions are back at the table, and children need to be in classrooms learning.

Hon Willow-Jean Prime: Does she realise that educators have no choice but to strike when she has refused to listen to them, despite open letters signed by hundreds of principals and petitions signed by thousands of concerned teachers and whānau?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: Well, they do have a choice, and here is an example of a union that did have a choice. The Primary Principals’ Collective Bargaining Union, with over 500 members, chose not to strike; chose to be at the bargaining table with the Public Service Commission; chose to be open and transparent; and chose to come to a settlement—a good, fair, and reasonable settlement. That is why more and more educators are joining their union, day by day—because they’re sick of the New Zealand Educational Institute.

Hon Willow-Jean Prime: Why does she continue to defer to Sir Brian Roche when the sector is crying out for some engagement with their Minister?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: Well, let me talk to you about engagement with the sector. Today, in fact, I’ve come directly here from Lower Hutt, where I have been at the Curriculum Roadshow with hundreds of principals and leaders and teachers, all in a room to learn about the changes. On Monday, we did the same thing in Christchurch. Fully booked, overflowing—the same thing on Monday. In fact, with all of this engagement that’s happening with the sector, we can’t find a venue big enough to hold them all.

Hon Willow-Jean Prime: What message—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Just wait. There are far too many conversations going on, particularly while Ministers are answering questions, as well as an unreasonable amount of barracking across the House, and so we’ll just have total silence for a moment while the question is asked.

Hon Willow-Jean Prime: What message does she think she sends educators when she is willing to prioritise her roadshow with her friends over meeting with those who are striking?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: Well, it turns out I’ve got hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of friends, because that’s how many people are turning up to the Curriculum Roadshow to learn about the changes and the reform in education that is going to be raising achievement and closing the education gap in this country—which is more than those guys did in six years.

Question No. 6—Prime Minister

6. 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: Does he stand by his statement in response to our questions yesterday that nurses have safe staffing conditions, when Te Whatu Ora’s own data showed that 50 percent of day shifts were understaffed in 16 districts over 10 months last year in our hospitals?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I’m incredibly proud of what this Government’s doing to improve the working environment for nurses. The fact that in less than two years, we’ve added 2,100 extra nurses into Health New Zealand is a really good thing, and the fact that we’ve made consistent efforts and investments in the healthcare system, with $17 billion in our first Budget; up another 7 percent in our second Budget—that’s all good stuff.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does he stand by his statement that nurses have safe working conditions, when nurses report that emergency departments are currently, under his Government’s hiring freeze, so short-staffed that some patients who soil themselves are left lying for hours in their own excrement because staff do not have time to help?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, in answer to the first part of the question, there is no hiring freeze. But what I’m proud about with this Government is that we’ve got crystal clear on what we expect the healthcare system to deliver for patients, and that is less wait times in emergency departments, improved immunisation rates for under-twos, faster access to first specialist appointments and elective surgeries, and, importantly, we’re making sure that we are delivering for patients and putting them at the heart of everything we do. It’s been good to see some encouraging turn-around. I’m sure all members of this House would thank the Minister of Health for the good work that he’s doing in trying to get those wait-lists run down.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Is he concerned that neonatal wards across Auckland, Whangārei, Christchurch, Palmerston North, and Tauranga hospitals were understaffed for more than a third of the shifts in the first half of this year, and, if so, what impacts does he think that these unsafe working conditions have on parents and newborns?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I’m just very proud of the progress that we’ve taken since the departure of a Labour-Greens Government, which is that, clearly, we have put more money in in the history of New Zealand, we have put more workforce into the healthcare system, we have good clarity on targets, and we now expect delivery from Health New Zealand to support patients.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Will the Prime Minister commit to empowering Government negotiators to turn up to the bargaining table equipped with the resources necessary to meet the actual real-world need to fix our education and healthcare systems?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I’m proud of what we’re doing on improving on our health and education systems, given the mess that we inherited from the last lot. But I’d just say that we are ready 24/7—ready to go—and so why don’t we actually cancel the strike tomorrow and actually go to the bargaining table tomorrow?

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does the Prime Minister understand that in order for the bargaining to actually work, the Government needs to empower its negotiators to actually turn up capable of offering the resources necessary to meet the need in our education and healthcare systems?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Absolutely, and that’s why we’re ready to go 24/7. The bottom line is that the unions are not. Coming in and talking to a Minister about the State of Palestine, not being prepared to have a conversation about having professional development or teacher-only days in the 12 weeks of school holidays that happen, going in as the Post Primary Teachers’ Association organisation and not taking a new deal out to their members—

Hon Dr Megan Woods: It’s a failure of your leadership.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: —rejecting binding arbitration from senior doctors—all of that says it’s politically motivated. They’re not serious. They don’t care about the parents, the kids, or the patients. We do. Get to the bargaining table—simple as.

SPEAKER: I will just point out to the person who was questioning by way of interjection the particular actions of someone else, you were referring to me—

Hon Dr Megan Woods: Sorry—not you.

SPEAKER: —which is not at all appropriate, and wildly inaccurate, I might also say.

Question No. 7—Justice

7. to the Minister of Justice: How is the Government progressing with its plan to restore law and order?

The Government is making good progress on its plan to restore law and order. We’ve committed to restoring consequences for crime and to keep those who cause the most harm in our society off the streets for longer in order to put victims back at the centre of the justice system. I could point to the progress made on our ambitious target to see 20,000 fewer victims of serious violent crime by 2029. In the most recent data released for the 12 months to May, it showed that there were 29,000 fewer victims than when we came into Government, which is 9,000 ahead of our target. That is still too many victims and we’ve got a lot more work to do, but the plan that we have is working.

Tom Rutherford: What updates can he provide on the Government’s recovery of court fines?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Well, our trial of clamping and seizing the cars of people who have not paid their court fines and reparations began in July and it is set to expand after it achieved more than $225,000 in fines and the seizure of 115 vehicles. In a three-month period, bailiffs scanned more than 70,000 number plates and identified 982 with overdue court fines and reparations. Of those, 278 paid on the spot, which was good, and 115 didn’t and had their cars seized. Sixteen of those have already been sold in auction, with another 52 on the way. It’s all about ensuring that people do what they’re supposed to do and that there are real consequences for the crime.

Tom Rutherford: What other actions is the Government taking to progress its plan to restore law and order?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Well, it is part of our quarter four plan. Before the end of the year, we’ll introduce legislation to strengthen consequences for crime in the Crimes Act, including new citizen’s arrest powers and a raft of coalition commitments, as well as to pass legislation to make stalking an illegal and jailable offence. There has been a lot of talk about that over many years, but this Government will do it before the end of the year. The Government is also taking policy decisions on options to provide more tools to address the rise in antisocial behaviour, which continues to be an issue in places like Auckland’s CBD. We want Kiwis and visitors to this country from overseas to feel safe and welcome on Queen Street and in our other town centres.

Tom Rutherford: What updates can he provide on the Government’s youth offending reduction target?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Well, alongside our target to reduce the number of victims of serious crime, we’ve also got a target led by Minister Chhour to reduce the number of children and young people with serious and persistent offending by 15 percent, which—the good news is—we have achieved as a Government already. There is much more to do, but if you are a victim of crime, and especially if you are victim of violent crime, it doesn’t matter how old the offender is—you and your family still suffer the consequences. That’s why it is so important that we deal more effectively with youth crime, which was out of control a couple of years ago, and good progress is being made.

Question No. 8—Public Service

8. to the Minister for the Public Service: Does she stand by her statement, “An efficient, professional, and politically neutral public service is essential”?

Yes.

Camilla Belich: Was she or her office consulted before the Public Service Commission approved taxpayer-funded ads about the strike on Thursday, and were they involved in the content, timing, or authorisation?

Hon JAMES MEAGER: I’m not aware of the details, but I am aware that the decision was the commissioner’s to make.

Camilla Belich: Did the Minister for the Public Service see the ads before they were published?

Hon JAMES MEAGER: I can’t answer that question, sorry, but I’m not aware of whether the Minister was.

Camilla Belich: Does she think it is in good faith to spend public money on messaging that attacks the bargaining position of doctors, nurses, and teachers?

Hon JAMES MEAGER: That’s not what the ads did. The ads clarified the information about the offers on the table and were a perfectly valid way of drawing attention to the enormous disruption being caused to families, to children, and to patients by the ongoing strikes. It reiterates the message that if we really want to get a resolution, get around the bargaining table and settle these disputes.

Camilla Belich: Does she still stand by her claim that the strike is politically motivated, and, if so, how is her own decision to attack the bargaining position of doctors, nurses, and teachers not itself politically motivated?

Hon JAMES MEAGER: Yes.

Question No. 9—Police

9. to the Associate Minister of Police: What recent reports has she seen about organised crime?

Last Friday, the Ministerial Advisory Group on Transnational, Serious and Organised Crime published their final report, Lead Boldly, Act Decisively. The advisory group was tasked with assessing the transnational organised crime landscape in New Zealand and was proposing bold solutions, and I would like to thank them for their hard work. Their report highlights a stark reality, which is that transnational, serious, and organised crime is a major threat to New Zealand’s national security. Our current operational response is strong, but across Government there is scope for a more cohesive approach, supported by the private sector and the public.

Andy Foster: What makes responding to transnational organised crime so challenging?

Hon CASEY COSTELLO: There are many reasons, but I’d like to focus on two. Organised crime groups operate at the pace of technology, while Governments are constrained to operate at the pace of law. Things like encrypted devices and artificial intelligence expand criminal capabilities and allow organised crime groups to connect, and we’re seeing cartels and groups operating and growing at scale. Drugs are the most noted commodity, and they form another major challenge because organised crime is commodity-agnostic. Organised crime will operate wherever money can be made. Whether it is drugs, people-trafficking, money-laundering, financial scams, or child exploitation, they are sophisticated and will always target the weakest link in our defences. However, the ministerial advisory group has been clear that the challenges that transnational organised crime presents are not insurmountable, and it has done an excellent job to recommend solutions.

Andy Foster: What proposals have the ministerial advisory group made?

Hon CASEY COSTELLO: I won’t touch on all the group’s recommendations because they are numerous and detailed, but instead I’d like to speak to their focus, which has been on four key themes: the first is creating cohesion and accountability across Government; the second is about targeting cash flows; the third is our role in supporting our Pacific neighbours; and, finally, the advisory group has highlighted the need to strengthen our communities and build resilience to organised crime.

Andy Foster: Given the wide-ranging recommendations of the ministerial advisory group, are we currently failing in the fight against organised crime?

Hon CASEY COSTELLO: No. Like many countries, we are not winning, but we certainly are not failing. As I stated in my response to the primary question, operational agencies like Police and the Customs Service are doing great work, and we’re seeing the results of that excellence regularly. We’re seizing record levels of drugs. In the last financial year, more than nine tonnes of illicit drugs was stopped from entering New Zealand. We’re also stopping illicit tobacco and child-exploitation material, with increasing frequency and at increasing scale. We know we need to keep lifting our game in response to the threat proposed, and we’re not sitting on our hands. We’ve been focused on finding solutions and improving operational performance, and that focus will continue. The ministerial advisory group report provides a bold vision and presents an opportunity to drive further innovation and effectiveness in how we respond to organised crime.

Question No. 10—Internal Affairs

10. to the Minister of Internal Affairs: Is she confident that firefighters have the appliances and equipment they need to keep them safe on the job; if so, why?

on behalf of the Minister of Internal Affairs: Yes, and I’m sure that the Minister would want me to say that she’s incredibly proud of the efforts that New Zealand’s firefighters make. They are some of the most trusted New Zealanders, some of the only New Zealanders who have a job of going into dangerous environments deliberately, and—from my experience of visiting fire stations—absolute backbones and great New Zealanders. We’re confident that they have the equipment in spite of a long legacy of decay. Since the merger of the voluntary and professional fire services in 2017, there has been a long period of time where the rate of replacement of fire engines has not kept up in such a way that it’s kept the average age down. In the last two years, an asset management plan has been put in place for the first time—which is quite a shocking revelation that it’s only been done in the last two years. At the same time, $20 million to $25 million per year is being invested in new fire trucks. Currently, 78 are on order, including five aerial appliances. However, they tend to take 18 to 24 months to be delivered. We are grateful for our firefighters. We are confident that they’re safe, but we acknowledge historical problems that we are resolving.

SPEAKER: Now, I would assume that since that was such a comprehensive answer, the rest of it can be quite concise because that was an exceptionally long answer.

Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: But it was very detailed.

SPEAKER: Well, there was the sort of detail that probably is just a little bit more than might have been expected in the House.

Lemauga Lydia Sosene: Does she agree with the Professional Firefighters Union that “FENZ is driving emergency response into the ground [and] with the failing fire appliances, unsafe stations, refusal to increase staffing,”; if not, why not?

Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: On behalf of the Minister of Internal affairs, I’m sure that a Labour member will realise that red things aren’t always reliable. However, there is a commitment, as I have mentioned, to upgrade the fire appliance fleet, which is under way, in order to address those concerns.

Lemauga Lydia Sosene: Does she agree with Brooke van Velden that all parties need to get around the bargaining table; if so, why has Fire and Emergency New Zealand (FENZ) failed to front up for bargaining?

Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: We do agree with that, and FENZ, through the Public Service Commission, is certainly being represented. Bargaining is available; it’s simply a question of the firefighters turning up.

Lemauga Lydia Sosene: Why should firefighters accept a pay offer that is a pay cut in real terms?

Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: The precise negotiations are being handled by the Public Service Commission, but I would make the point that like all Public Service jobs, it is New Zealanders who have to pay for them—overwhelmingly in the case of fire—through levies put on people’s home insurance. It is easy to say in Opposition that you think that everybody should be paid more. However, it is also true that in these negotiations there are two sides that must be represented, and one of those are the New Zealanders who pay the cost.

Lemauga Lydia Sosene: Is the Professional Firefighters Union correct that the “job of a firefighter is now more dangerous than it was in the 1990s.”, and, if so, will she instruct FENZ to make a real, sensible offer to ensure our firefighters are safe at work?

Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: First of all, we don’t have—or at least I’m not aware of, on behalf of the Minister of Internal Affairs—a comparison that would validate or invalidate that comparison with the 1990s. What I do know is that FENZ is extremely wary of the dangers that firefighters face. As I mentioned in my initial answer, we recognise that they are the only group of New Zealanders, or one of the few, who are required to go into dangerous environments as part of their work. None the less, it’s not true that money makes up for danger. We must take health and safety as a priority, perhaps above all else.

Question No. 11—Health

11. to the Minister of Health: Does he agree with the Prime Minister that nurses have safe working conditions; if so, why?

Yes, I do agree with the Prime Minister. Since coming into office, this Government has added around 2,000 more nurses to the public health system compared to 2023, alongside hundreds of additional doctors. That’s backed by a record additional $16.68 billion investment in health over three Budgets, including initiatives focused on improving workplace safety and reducing wait-lists for patients. Health New Zealand is committed to safe care. That’s why we’re growing the health workforce and holding the system accountable through having clear health targets, so that patients get the care they need when they need it.

Ricardo Menéndez March: Do current staffing levels in our hospitals provide for safe working conditions; if so, how?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: As I’ve said, we have continued to increase the number of nurses working in our health system, with around 2,000 more nurses compared to 2023, alongside hundreds of additional doctors. We’ll continue to focus on our front-line service delivery and on reducing wait-lists for patients, and I’d say to the member that one of the biggest risks in our health system is the waiting times for patients and those wait-lists are only going to increase with tomorrow’s strikes.

Ricardo Menéndez March: What does he say to Ali, a registered nurse who said, “I am very upset and shocked by the Prime Minister stating we have safe working conditions. Our wards are critically understaffed. Patients are not receiving the care they need and deserve.”?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, I’d say to that individual that this Government is continuing to invest in having more nursing staff in our hospitals. We have around 2,000 more nurses in the public health system compared to the Labour-Greens Government, which we inherited the challenges of our health system from. We are focused on front-line service delivery, while they were focused on restructuring bureaucracy.

Ricardo Menéndez March: Who is correct: nurses across the country who are telling us that they do not have safe working conditions, or the Prime Minister, who has said that nurses have safe working conditions?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, the facts speak for themselves, and the facts are that there are more nurses working at Health New Zealand today than under the Labour-Greens coalition, which was more focused on restructuring our health system during a pandemic. We’re focused on health delivery; they were focused on rearranging bureaucracy.

Ricardo Menéndez March: Why is he not recognising that nurses are telling us across the country that they’re not experiencing safe working conditions as a result of current understaffing?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, there’s a range of things that this Government is doing to invest in our nursing workforce and to invest in delivery for patients, and under this Government, the number of nurses working at Health New Zealand has increased. They are providing quality care and they do an incredible job on behalf of our patients. Quality safety measures are stable or have been improving over the past five years, we’re investing in regular training for staff, we’re investing in security in our emergency departments, we’re continuing to invest in our nursing workforce and in our medical workforces, and we’ve also put health targets in place which show that we are starting to see progress after the last Government allowed wait-lists to balloon whilst they fiddled with the bureaucracy. We’re focused on patients; they’re focused on bureaucracy.

Question No. 12—Mental Health

12. to the Minister for Mental Health: What recent announcements has he made on rolling out new mental health services in emergency departments?

Our mental health plan is focused on delivering results: faster access to support, more front-line workers, and a better crisis response. Recently, I announced the introduction of peer support workers in the North Shore emergency department, completing the roll-out of the service across all three major Auckland hospitals alongside Dunedin, Christchurch, Wellington, and Waikato hospitals. For anyone in mental health crisis, arriving at a busy emergency department can be overwhelming. Having a peer support specialist who understands what they’re going through can make a real difference. No matter where you live, this Government is committed to ensuring that timely support is there.

Dr Carlos Cheung: Why are peer support workers part of Government plans to improve crisis response in mental health?

Hon MATT DOOCEY: I’ve always been open to saying that one of the biggest barriers to timely mental health support in New Zealand is having too many workforce vacancies. Peer support specialists are available to listen, share their experience, and provide timely support. They can also link people to community mental health services, resulting in better outcomes once they leave hospital. Whether your child, a friend, or a family member is reaching out for support, we’re committed to ensuring support is there.

Dr Carlos Cheung: What feedback has the Minister received about the impact of peer support workers?

Hon MATT DOOCEY: One of my top priorities is strengthening prevention and early intervention. The feedback from hospitals with peer support workers has been very positive. A peer support worker in Wellington told me how surreal it was to be helping others in the same emergency department that they came through in crisis a few years earlier. In Dunedin, a former patient told me that on the worst day of her life, this is exactly the type of service she wishes she had when she was struggling. To deliver a better crisis response, we want to ensure there is someone to call, someone to respond, and somewhere to go.

Dr Carlos Cheung: Where else are peer support workers being used to improve mental health services?

Hon MATT DOOCEY: Our mental health plan is working. We are delivering reduced wait times and increasing the workforce. Since coming into Government, the peer support lived-experience workforce has grown by almost 100 percent. We are rolling out peer support workers not only in emergency departments but also in crisis recovery cafes and eating disorder services, and also to help young people with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder. When someone takes the step of reaching out for support, workforce should never be a barrier.

Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke: Will the Minister investigate the mental health crisis in Thames following a serious mental health incident that was brought to his attention by a local mental health rangatira in Hauraki earlier this Monday?

Hon MATT DOOCEY: I think it’s always important that we respond to people who lay some serious concerns about the mental health system. As the mental health Minister, how I hold myself to account—and this Government does—is setting New Zealand’s first mental health targets. For the first time in New Zealand, we can use the data to go into communities around New Zealand and understand the level of access to that timely support. That will get rid of the postcode lottery for mental health in New Zealand.

Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke: How will his new announcements on mental health services address the lack of coordination and unwillingness of public services and agencies in Hauraki to intervene in serious incidents?

Hon Matt Doocey: Well, that member raises a significant point. New Zealanders’ experience traditionally of the mental health system is one of fragmentation and, actually, it takes too long to be seen. That’s why the function of this Government is to join up the mental health system and provide faster access to support. That is why we are now able to go back to the 20 health districts, understand the performance of each of those areas, and ensure they deliver a level of service that Kiwis should expect in mental health: one week for primary mental health and addiction support; three weeks for specialist mental health and addiction support.

Question No. 10 to Minister—Amended Answer

Point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek leave to make a personal explanation to correct an answer to a question.

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

Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: In my answer to question No. 10, I suggested that the Public Service Commission was negotiating on behalf of Fire and Emergency New Zealand (FENZ). That is, in fact, not true. FENZ is negotiating on behalf of FENZ.

Thank you for that clarification. As members leave the House over the next 30 seconds, please do so quickly, quietly, and without any discussions in the aisles.