Oral Questions

1. to the Minister of Finance: When were personal income tax thresholds last adjusted?

Personal income tax thresholds were adjusted almost exactly a year ago, on 31 July 2024, and, as members may recall—because many of them opposed this tax relief for New Zealanders—the Government increased the lowest income tax threshold from $14,000 of annual income to $15,600, the next threshold from $48,000 to $53,000, and the next from $70,000 to $78,100. At the same time, the Government expanded eligibility for the independent earner tax credit, and we increased the in-work tax credit paid to low to middle income families with children.

Suze Redmayne: By how much have New Zealand households benefited from these tax changes over the past year?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Well, of course, that depends on their own individual circumstances and those of their family and household. I will give you some averages to illustrate it. Inland Revenue expects that around 1.9 million households will have benefited by $60 a fortnight, on average. That’s $60 a fortnight that would have been denied to them by the members who opposed that tax relief. Inland Revenue also expects that households with children will have benefited by $78 a fortnight, on average—relief that would have been denied to them by those who opposed tax relief—and Inland Revenue points out that in some circumstances, households will have benefited by more than $100 a fortnight.

Suze Redmayne: What other assistance have households received from the Government?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: More than 65,000 households, and rising, have received additional help with early childhood education costs from FamilyBoost. Members may recall—because many of them still oppose it—that FamilyBoost has so far given households a rebate of 25 percent of their early childhood fees and that from this month it is rising to 40 percent of their early childhood fees. I could point to many more things, but one policy I would particularly highlight is the move to 12month prescriptions, which will be coming early next year. For families who get stable long-term medications like asthma inhalers, insulin for diabetes, ADHD medication, and blood pressure tablets, this move will save them unnecessary medical costs and give health professionals more time to deal with other patients.

Suze Redmayne: What does this mean for the cost of living?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: The cost of living is the relationship between two things: how much people get in their pay packet—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Sorry—just a minute. That’s ridiculous. One or two comments by way of interjection—as has always been the case—is acceptable, but not that barrage. The Minister will start again.

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: The cost of living is the relationship between two things: how much people get in their pay packet and the prices they pay. We’ve seen in recent history that when prices rise very rapidly to a peak of 7.3 percent, as in 2022—the highest inflation since 1990—wages can’t keep up, and hence there was a cost of living crisis. The Government is focused on both sides of the equation: on costs and on incomes. We are taking deliberate measures to address structural issues like competition that can lead to prices being higher than otherwise. Opposed by many members of this House, we gave tax relief that benefited working families. We are driving sustainable increases in incomes through measures that will grow the economy.

Question No. 2—Prime Minister

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

Yes, and especially our move to ban surcharge fees on in-store debit and credit payments so that Kiwis don’t have to pay to use their own money, and, of course, this follows a recent announcement by the Commerce Commission to reduce the bank fees that retailers pay to accept card payments, saving retailers $90 million a year. We want to make sure those savings are fully passed on to Kiwis, so we are banning fees at the checkout. That means no more nasty surprises or hidden fees, and Kiwis will know what the price is and can shop with confidence.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Why does his Government think that in a cost of living crisis, hiking up the fees of board directors by up to 80 percent is more important than pay rises for teachers and nurses, who are being offered a paltry 1 percent pay increase—less than the rate of inflation?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, as that member will well understand, having been a Minister for the public sector, we want to make sure that our Crown entities which are delivering some our most critical public services are incredibly well governed and well managed and well led. We’ve been advised that we need more competitive payment for those directors, which, essentially, hasn’t moved in the course of over a decade, although I know that the member would have dealt with it himself when he passed on pay increases to directors back in 2022, I think, as well. What we’re doing is making sure that, actually, we’ve got competitiveness. It’s never going to be as competitive as public sector pay, but it’s important, given that we’ve got large expenditure going on, that it’s well governed.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: So why should teachers and nurses have to settle for pay increases below the rate of inflation—in other words, a real-terms pay cut—while he’s increasing the pay of directors by up to 80 percent?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, in answer to the first leg of the question, I’d just say that on nurses, there has been a big effort around nurse remuneration over a number of years. We are in a place where we have average nurse salary and incomes at $125,000, which is equal to New South Wales, which is 35 percent wealthier than New Zealand, and we’ve also been hiring more nurses. We’ve got 2,100 more nurses in our system, there’s a lot less attrition, and they’re increasingly well remunerated. The only people who lose out on strike actions are those people who want elective surgeries, and we want to be able to get them to them.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: So, in addition to denying the fact that the cost of living crisis continues for New Zealand families, is he now asserting that the problem is that nurses are just too well-paid because of the pay increases they got under a Labour Government?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I reject the characterisation in that question. All I was explaining to the member, who would well understand, is that it’s important that we will never be able to offer private sector pay to public sector directors. But we’re making sure it’s more competitive so that we get good governance, so that the money that we’re spending is well spent and gives good value for money.

Hon David Seymour: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek your guidance. In the past, Speakers have ruled that you cannot begin a question with a word like “So”, make a statement as an assertion, and then lead on to a question. Usually, a question must begin with a question word in this House.

SPEAKER: That’s right, and in this case, it was “So does he deny”, and so I overlooked the “So” in this case. I’m sure that the Leader of the Opposition knows the rules pretty well, in and out. I recall occasions when the Minister himself has asked questions that have had one word preceding a question word, and that’s not unreasonable.

Hon David Seymour: Yeah, but I got away with it!

SPEAKER: Yeah? Well, guess what’s happening here.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Why, during a cost of living crisis, has his Government prioritised $300 million in tax breaks for a multinational tobacco company while everyday New Zealanders are left paying up to $100 per visit just to see their local GP, if they can find one?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Again, I reject the characterisation of that question, and the member has come back to this point at all times. What we are doing is making sure that people who are addicted to smoking can actually, through heated tobacco products, have an opportunity to come off smoking. We didn’t have those products in the market; they are now in the market. We’re extending that pilot—that trial. The member knows that it’s not a tax. The member knows that it’s a contingency due to lost excise and revenue that would be coming, because if we are successful at moving people off smoking into other products, it reduces harm. That’s a good thing.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Does he stand by his statement that “We have to fix and rebuild this economy so we can actually reduce the cost of living for people”; if so, why has the economy flatlined and why have costs continued to explode under his leadership?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Look, I welcome the member’s new-found interest in the economy and the cost of living, because it’s not that long ago that he was in Government and he actually created this mess that we’re now cleaning up. But I’d just say to that member, let’s just go through a few things, because if you’re really serious about reducing the cost of living, will you support a rates cap on councils—yes or no?

SPEAKER: No, no—sorry. The Prime Minister can answer a question, but he can’t ask questions.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: It’s a rhetorical one.

SPEAKER: Well, rhetorical or not, it’s a question. [Interruption] Do you want to continue the answer?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Sorry, it was just a rhetorical answer—is what I’m asking.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: When essential costs like groceries, fees, Government levies, and doctors visits continue to rise, why does he respond to public frustration not with solutions but by making it harder for people who do remain in New Zealand to vote him out?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I’d just say to the member that this a Government that is working incredibly hard. We have made sure that we offer people tax relief—low and middle income working New Zealanders who have suffered because of the conditions that his former Government created. This is a Government that’s expanding FamilyBoost to make sure that low and middle income working New Zealanders can get access and subsidisation for their early childcare costs. This is a Government that has created rent stability. This is a Government that has taken people off social housing wait-lists. This is a Government that is doing everything it can to lower the cost of living for people through good economic management—something that he and his party just don’t understand.

Question No. 3—Commerce and Consumer Affairs

3. to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs: What recent announcements has the Government made regarding reduced fees at the checkout?

Good news: the Government is banning surcharges. This ban will apply to in-store payments for debit, credit, and EFTPOS cards, putting money back in Kiwis’ pockets. Whether a customer is tapping, swiping, or paying with their phone, they’ll soon pay the advertised price and no more. It’s a win for consumers and a step towards a fairer, simpler payment system. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: Just wait for a moment, please. All right, carry on.

Nancy Lu: Why is it important that Kiwis know exactly what they are paying before they tap or swipe?

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: No one likes getting stung with a surprise fee at the checkout, and I believe that New Zealanders should be able to pay for things without being penalised just because they choose to pay for a transaction in a certain way. It’s about honesty, clarity, and respect for people’s hard-earned money.

Nancy Lu: What will this change mean for Mr Major from Thames?

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: By May 2026 at the latest, this change will do away with those coffee-stained, crumpled-up stickers on payment terminals, and for Mr Major from Thames, he will be able to buy his coffee and scone and know that the price that he sees on the cabinet will be the price he pays at the till. This change is about bringing transparency back to pricing and ensuring Kiwis get the best bang for their buck.

Nancy Lu: What feedback has the Minister received on this change?

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: I have received overwhelmingly positive feedback from consumers on this change. Consumer New Zealand has said that “scrapping surcharges will put millions back into the pockets of New Zealanders and make accepting payments much simpler for merchants.” Business New Zealand has said that consumers should be encouraged to use modern modes of payment without having to second-guess a purchase or having to do the “insert card” dance at the till. Consumers are tired of these sneaky charges, and under this Government these surcharges are gone.

Question No. 4—Finance

4. to the Minister of Finance: Tank yu tumas, Mr Speaker. Does she stand by all her statements and actions?

In context, yes.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Who is right: the New Zealand Food Network, who said, “We genuinely believed that there was going to be a drop off once everything got back to normal, but then this thing called the cost of living crisis kicked in … so it’s not going down”, or Nicola Willis, who says that the country is “back on course”?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: To address this question, I want to remind members of this House of some cold, hard numbers. I’ll start with December 2022, when food price inflation was 10.7 percent. I’ll then take you to March 2023, when it was 11.3 percent, and June 2023, when it was 12.3 percent. I then take you to June 2025, where it is 4.2 percent. Food price inflation is far lower than it was under the last Government, and I would say that that is progress.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Are things really getting back on course when the Compassion Soup Kitchen supplied 1,300 more meals than the previous month, and have said, “The increases right now are just unprecedented”?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: I want to acknowledge the Compassion Soup Kitchen and the many non-governmental organisations who support New Zealanders in need, many of whom are vulnerable, and what I would highlight for the House is the statements I’ve made previously, which is that when unemployment is high—as it currently is—that has a significant impact on households. I note that unemployment is tracking almost exactly to the forecasts members opposite presented prior to the election; in fact, when we look at the granular detail, unemployment is slightly lower than the previous Government was forecasting. So while unemployment at these levels is regrettable and is undoubtedly having an impact on New Zealand families, we are, as a Government, able to say that this is absolutely the result of the economic crisis left to us by the last Government.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Is the country back on course when Kaibosh Food Rescue have said that four years ago, 20 people showing up at the Lower Hutt food bank was a busy day, and now it sees between 120 to 135 people each day?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Well, members of this Government get up every day to think about how we can improve this economy so that it delivers for New Zealanders, including those in need making use of food, rescue services, and other support services. Now, what we can look to is the data to track that progress, and what we can see is that after a couple of years of real GDP per capita going backwards under the last Government, inflation remaining out of control for three years, and interest rates being cranked through the roof, we are now in a situation where we have had two successive quarters of real GDP growth where inflation has got back into target and where interest rates have reduced significantly. Now, those are the foundations. There is a lot more work to do, but it’s a lot of progress since the last lot trashed the joint.

SPEAKER: Yeah, just calm down on those ending comments after some statistics are presented to the House.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: What does it say about her priorities when she finds funding for tobacco companies and board directors but not for community providers, who are dealing with significant increases in demand from families because of her Government’s decisions?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Well, I’d reject just about every characterisation in that question, in particular acknowledging that, as the Minister for Social Investment has outlined, we are working to develop a much better contracting approach with community organisations. However, on the question of tobacco excise, I would simply point out to the member that our goal is to move more people away from smoking, and the numbers which she refers to actually would result from people not paying tobacco excise any more because they have stopped smoking. So if the member’s position is that she wants us to collect more tobacco excise because more people should be smoking, I’d put to it her that that’s a very irresponsible position, and I’d prefer to have the reduction in excise that occurs when fewer people are smoking.

Hon David Seymour: Can the Minister of Finance confirm that the inflation peak in 2022 was the highest since 1990, and do those two years have anything in common?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Well, students of history will know that Labour Governments have had a history of driving up inflation, putting holes in the books, and destroying the economy. But I would like to just share facts, Mr Speaker—referring to your earlier guidance. It wasn’t just the 7.3 percent peak, I say to the Deputy Prime Minister, but it was also the 7.2 percent in September 2022, the 7.2 percent in December 2022, the 6.7 percent in March 2023, the 6 percent in June 2023, the 5.6 percent—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Yeah, good—that’s enough, and can I just say to the Opposition that if you want me to do something about something, don’t sit there trying to tell me what the rules are.

Question No. 5—Prime Minister

5. 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: Will his changes to voter enrolments lead to more or fewer people voting?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I hope more people participate in our democracy. It’s a great thing. It’s a gift that should be really treasured incredibly well, and we hope that more people continue to participate in voting in New Zealand.

Hon Marama Davidson: Does he want to make it easier for more people to vote, and, if so, why is he proposing a change that may see an estimated 22,700 people have their eligibility to vote directly affected?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: There is plenty of time before the next election for people to get enrolled. All we’re doing is making sure that it’s two weeks before election day and before advance voting begins. That’s a good thing. If Australians can do it 26 days earlier, I’m sure Kiwis can do it in 12 or 13 days.

Hon Marama Davidson: Should renters, young people, Māori, Asian, and Pasifika communities be afforded less access to democracy just because they are more likely to need to cast a special vote?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I think all New Zealanders are quite capable of getting registered two weeks out from an election, and I think it would be insulting to suggest otherwise. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: No, don’t—just hold on. This ridiculous level from both sides of the House is very unhelpful.

Hon Marama Davidson: Who does he see as worthy of a say in our democracy, if not renters, young people, Māori, Asian, and Pasifika communities?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: We want all New Zealanders to have a say in our democracy.

Hon Marama Davidson: Does he agree that the fundamental right to vote sits at the heart of our democratic system, or does he believe it should be reserved as a privilege for those with the time and resources to engage in politics?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: In answer to the first part of the question, yes. We want all New Zealanders to participate in the voting process.

SPEAKER: Question—

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Why are you so scared of voters?

SPEAKER: Well, can we go on? Question No. 6, the Hon Ayesha Verrall.

Question No. 6—Health

6. to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by his statement that his focus “is on putting patients first”?

In the context it was made, yes. We’re putting patients first, to ensure that Kiwis can get the care they need when they need it. Our Government inherited significant wait-lists, which meant that too many patients had been waiting too long for the care they need. That’s why we’ve brought back health targets to focus the system on delivery, made a record investment of $16.68 billion over three Budgets, and continued to strengthen our health workforce. Whilst these efforts are starting to show positive progress, we know there is still much more work to be done. We’re getting on with the job, and we won’t stop until we deliver better health outcomes for all New Zealanders.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: How was he putting patients first when he cut the workforce responsible for protecting patient safety by 30 percent?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, the Health New Zealand report which that member is interested in and which that team was responsible for stopped being published in the 2019-20 financial year, and Health New Zealand has committed to restarting publishing of that report next year.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Point of order, Mr Speaker. That supplementary question did not reference a report. It referenced a 30 percent cut to the workforce that is responsible for protecting patient safety, and I don’t believe that that part of the question was addressed.

SPEAKER: Well, would the Minister like to make a response to that.

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, I note that the reporting which that team deliver is going to be restarted next year, after it stopped in 2019-20, and I have made my expectations clear to Health New Zealand that it’s about the outcomes that are important to the delivery for this Government.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Point of order, Mr Speaker. This team has a global responsibility for the quality and safety systems in their hospital. I didn’t ask a question about writing a report, though I am transacting that issue—

SPEAKER: No, but you did ask the question about, from my memory, whether he is concerned about the outcomes from this group if their numbers are cut. I think he’s just answered that question.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Is a 30 percent increase in ACC claims for people who suffer injuries, infections, and pressure sores in hospital a sign of a Government that puts patients first, or a sign of an overcrowded and understaffed health system?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, that is not an acceptable rise in pressure injuries in our hospitals, and Health New Zealand has a responsibility to ensure that it is addressing those concerns. However, I would say that this Government has invested significantly in Health New Zealand: $16.68 billion over three Budgets. There are 2,100 more nurses working at Health New Zealand today than when we came into Government, 600 more doctors are working at Health New Zealand today than when we came into Government, and our focus is on ensuring that Health New Zealand is delivering on that investment and people and money so that patients get better access to care, following the significant wait-list the last Government left us to fix up.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: How is he putting patients first when he has cut funding to the Health and Disability Commissioner to investigate instances of poor treatment and breaches of the code of patients’ rights?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: There was a one-off increase in funding allocated in this year’s Budget to ensure that they could continue to address the wait-list—again, a significant wait-list—and complaints made to the Health and Disability Commissioner. There was a one-off funding increase that the previous Government had put forward, which was time-limited. We have put another $1 million in—a time-limited amount of money—to continue the work that the Health and Disability Commissioner is doing to get on top of the wait-list, and the advice that I have received from the Health and Disability Commissioner is that they’re making good progress on that.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Does he accept that he has cut safety systems, suppressed reporting, ignored the warning signs, and closed off accountability, and that next time when tragedy strikes, he has no one to blame but himself?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, when it comes to the reporting which the member talked about in her question, I—

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: I didn’t.

Hon SIMEON BROWN: When she talked about the reporting in her question, I would note the report that she is referencing was a report that was discontinued in the 2019-20 financial year. That report is now being reinstated by Health New Zealand next year.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Point of order, Mr Speaker. It does seem like the Minister has really got it in his head that this question was about a particular report. He said “a report” in his answer. I’ve not raised a report in my question; I’ve raised serious concerns about the patient safety system, and I’ve not had that addressed.

SPEAKER: You used the word “reporting”, and I’d have to say it’s very hard for me, sitting here listening to your questions about the range of activities across the health sector, without expecting that there might be some reporting of that work. So I don’t agree with you that there is a problem with the answer from the Minister.

Question No. 7—Resources

7. to the Minister for Resources: What upcoming announcements, if any, is he planning for the resources portfolio?

This week is an extraordinary time for heat, gas, and steam. Along with my colleagues Minister Upston and Minister Reti, I’ll be launching the Government’s draft geothermal strategy tomorrow, reflective of my commitment to renewable energy. However, to ensure that we don’t repeat the errors of the past and continue the perfidy of the cancellation of the oil and gas industry by Jacinda Ardern, we will have the oil and gas exploration—ill-fated—piece of legislation changed at the end of this week.

Jamie Arbuckle: Why is geothermal energy important for the New Zealand economy?

Hon SHANE JONES: It’s important that our economy boosts its productivity through more affordable and secure energy. As we grapple with the legacy of failed energy policy, cancellation of the oil and gas industry, and unicorn-kissing, shallow green ideas, we’re a lot more serious. We’re unlocking the geothermal potential—

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Thank you, sir. This is a clear example of the very thing that you have warned this Government about numerous times over various sitting weeks of using a question asked by their own team to express their opinions on previous policies. Now, it is a clear attempt to—

SPEAKER: Thank you. I agree with you, and I think that the Minister should recognise that the attack aspect of his answer is not acceptable. Talking about factual matters is and it has been allowed, but the general tenor of that answer falls in the category of using a Government question to attack the Opposition, which is not acceptable.

Hon SHANE JONES: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I’m very happy that you’ve used the word “factual”. It is a fact that the oil and gas industry was chilled, halted, as a consequence of a decision announced by so-said woman.

SPEAKER: Well, that might be true in your opinion, but the reality is that there is still gas flowing at the moment, so it can’t have been stopped dead. So I’m sure there will be another supplementary that gives you the opportunity to—[Interruption] Oh, sorry, are you still answering that other supplementary?

Hon SHANE JONES: Yes, I think that in the interests of democracy, I should give a fuller answer.

SPEAKER: Well, I think that the House has lost track of it, so Jamie Arbuckle might like to repeat it, word for word.

Jamie Arbuckle: Why is geothermal energy important for the New Zealand economy?

Hon SHANE JONES: Our economy requires a diverse range of energy sources. Geothermal is a key feature in ensuring that we have affordable energy, that our productivity is boosted, and that we have rules, laws, and opportunities where it can be further utilised. We have the ability to become world leaders: we have the human capital and the technology, and, with appropriate modesty, I would say we have the political leadership.

Jamie Arbuckle: What more can he tell us about the draft geothermal strategy?

Hon SHANE JONES: Tomorrow, I shall travel to Taupō, the heart of geothermal potential, and unveil the strategy. Consultation will begin, as befits a participatory democracy like the one I’m privileged to belong to. I’m also very keen to identify what barriers, red tape, and third-party interests might be blighting the ability of us to accelerate the availability of geothermal energy for tourism, recreational purposes, manufacturing, and further electricity. This follows the $60 million funding through the Regional Infrastructure Fund, designed to ensure that supercritical deep geothermal energy can play a bigger role in securing a resilient energy future.

Jamie Arbuckle: What more can he tell us regarding reversing the ban on offshore gas exploration?

Hon SHANE JONES: A worse decision in the history of capitalism in New Zealand, driven by a very shallow, juvenile, and mistaken approach—

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Point of order, sir.

SPEAKER: Sorry, I know what you’re going to say, but for a Minister to say that a previous decision was bad is not out of order. I think you were heading into territory that’s probably unnecessary, but if that was your point, then that’s what I would respond to.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: No, certainly not, sir.

SPEAKER: Oh, it’s something new? My goodness! That’s unusual.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Yes, just specifically, the use of “shallow” and “juvenile” surely cannot be an acceptable—

SPEAKER: Yeah, I just said that to him.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: —use of language. That’s right. So—

SPEAKER: Yeah.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: —and with respect, sir, he shouldn’t be allowed to continue along those lines when you’ve already warned him not to do so.

SPEAKER: Yes, that’s right, and so I’m sure he won’t.

Hon SHANE JONES: Right. When this bill passes, it will remove the ban of petroleum exploration beyond onshore Taranaki—something, sadly, that has left Taranaki bereft of economic opportunity. But wait! Ironsands await—they’re on their way. A new tier of mineral permits and a new tier of entitlements will make it easier, and this bill will ensure that when dealing with decommissioning, there’s a balance between protecting the Crown balance sheet and ensuring that investors in this sector continue to prosper. It is also—

SPEAKER: Good—OK.

Hon SHANE JONES: —going to ensure that the thousands of dollars sucked out of the Taranaki economy will over time be restored in inverse—

SPEAKER: Yeah—that’s it.

Hon SHANE JONES: —proportions to what the Māori Party actually deliver—

SPEAKER: No, no—no, sit down. Thank you.

Question No. 8—Justice

8. to the Minister of Justice: What recent announcements has he made on the recovery of court fines? [Interruption]

SPEAKER: Just everyone calm down.

Last Friday, I announced that the Government is trialling new technology to identify vehicles registered to those who have overdue court fines and reparations. If they do, the vehicle may be clamped and seized by bailiffs, and the message is simple: pay your court fine and reparations, and if you haven’t—if you’ve left somebody out of pocket—you might soon find yourself walking home. We promised to find new, effective ways to get people paying their court fines, and that’s exactly what we’re delivering.

Tom Rutherford: Why is the recovery of overdue court fines important?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Because when the courts impose fines or reparations, they need to be paid, or the system loses its credibility, and for reparations victims, the victims are victimised again. As of 30 June this year, there were $456 million in fines and $104 million in reparations outstanding, and that is not something that we’re prepared to tolerate.

Tom Rutherford: What insight can he share on the success of the clamping trial over the weekend?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Well, 4,859 vehicles were scanned by bailiffs positioned at breath-testing stations on the weekend. Of those, 208 people were identified as having outstanding fines. The majority of them had a payment plan in place, but there were 32 that didn’t. Of those 32, 31 paid their fines in full—without a surcharge, maybe; well, we’re going to change that—and one didn’t pay, and their vehicle was seized and towed. The Ministry of Justice noticed an 11 percent increase in the number of fine payments made online yesterday. The message can’t be clear enough: there are no more excuses—pay your fines.

Tom Rutherford: Will people be left stranded on the streets?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: No. I’ve seen some misinformed comments by other political parties scaremongering on this issue. Bailiffs will make sure that people who have had their cars seized or clamped have arrangements to get to where they need to go. But if you don’t want to use public transport and you don’t want your cars taken, take responsibility and call 0800 4 FINES to make a payment.

Question No. 9—Infrastructure

9. to the Minister for Infrastructure: Does he stand by his statement, “This is a Government serious about investing in New Zealand’s future. Serious about infrastructure”; if so, why have 18,000 jobs been lost in the construction sector since this Government took office?

Yes, and, in response to the second part of the question, the construction sector has undoubtedly been affected by the economic downturn. In answer to her question as to why the jobs have been lost, I would say that this Government came to office in November 2023 with record inflation, a cost of living crisis, high interest rates, and, ultimately, a recession, and in a recession, as the rest of the economy has discovered and as has the construction sector, unfortunately, jobs are lost. But we are doing what we need to do as a Government to get this economy growing again, and there are green shoots of confidence coming through, through the EBOSS report and others, and I would point the member to that.

Hon Ginny Andersen: Why did 1,000 people lose their jobs in the construction sector last month?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Well, ultimately, if you want the literal answer, the employers of those people decided not to employ them any more. This Government is doing what it can do across a range of initiatives in order to support the construction sector. As the member, I think, noticed—I hope she noticed—there is $6 billion of Government-funded construction due to start in the next six months across roading, across health, and across school property, where there’s $800 million alone of school property projects about to start in the next six months. There are significant roading projects about to start—and, of course, that’s just the Government-funded part of the construction sector. As interest rates come down, there will be increased economic confidence around the construction sector, particularly residential construction, and of course we want employers to have the confidence to employ more people as the economic recovery gets under way.

Hon Ginny Andersen: How many of the 47,000 Kiwis who left New Zealand last year were construction workers?

Rt Hon Christopher Luxon: Support fast track.

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: I don’t have that number to hand, but if the member puts it down in writing, I’m happy to look at it. I would say—as the Prime Minister rightly pointed out as the member was asking that question—the Opposition is good at talk about construction sector losses, but very bad at offering—

SPEAKER: That’s all right.

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: —answers—

SPEAKER: No, no—that’s not their job. Another supplementary?

Hon Ginny Andersen: What does it say about this Government’s commitment to infrastructure when the building sector is the least confident sector surveyed by the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research Quarterly Survey of Business Opinion for July 2025?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: What it says is that we are in a difficult situation economically caused by the recession induced by the last Government’s profligate spending and useless economic policies. The Government cannot magic up jobs overnight. The Government cannot magic up an economic recovery. What it actually takes is sound fiscal management, reducing red tape, sensible investments in infrastructure—which the Government is doing—across health, across education, across roads, and across rail, and that will generate the economic return to form that this country needs.

Hon Ginny Andersen: How can he claim to be serious about infrastructure when all his Government has done is re-announce infrastructure projects, stop construction work, and slash support for apprenticeships?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Well, in relation to the second part of that member’s question, it’s interesting that she can’t name a single project that has been stopped, because stopping Lake Onslow in 2035 does not affect construction jobs today. Stopping—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: No, sorry. The Minister will stop, and the House will go silent for the balance of that answer.

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Stopping Auckland light rail, which even on the most heroic assumptions was going to start in 2032 or maybe 2033—it may affect the number of people working as the consultants, who made hundreds of millions of dollars out of Auckland light rail, but it doesn’t actually affect construction jobs today. In relation to the first part of the member’s question, the Government has put more money into the projects that we inherited from the last Government. I’ll give you two examples: one is the Melling Interchange, which did not have enough money appropriated to be delivered properly. This Government drew down a tagged contingency to put it into it—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Sorry, is someone down there talking when I’ve said we’ll hear it in silence?

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I think you might have more chance of getting silence on this side if the Minister was talking about the actions of his Government and not the actions of the previous Government.

SPEAKER: Well, that’s true, but for a moment there I thought he was being complimentary. Please talk entirely about this Government.

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Well, the member asked me a question about projects of the previous Government, and so I think I’m entitled to respond to those projects. The point is some of the projects the member was talking about had had money appropriated in March 2020, for which the money appropriated was half of what was required. I’ll give you an example: Ōtaki to North Levin, we were told, was going to cost $817 million in February 2020. I can advise the House—

SPEAKER: Yeah—good.

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: —that the cost to deliver that—

SPEAKER: I think you’ve made the point.

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: —is at least double.

SPEAKER: That’ll do. I think you’ve made the point.

Question No. 10—Building and Construction

10. to the Minister for Building and Construction: What announcements has the Government made about overseas building products?

As of yesterday, the first pathway in the Government’s new regime for overseas-approved building products is open. Along with the Prime Minister, I made that announcement in the member’s own electorate on the weekend. It means that thousands more high-quality products can now be used more easily on construction sites across New Zealand. This helps tradies get on with the important job of building housing and other infrastructure that Kiwis need.

Dr Carlos Cheung: Why were these changes needed?

Hon CHRIS PENK: These changes are critical to bringing down the cost of building in New Zealand—costs that had jumped by 40 percent since the year 2019. It’s now 50 percent more expensive in this country to build a stand-alone house than in Australia, which I and others have described as, frankly, outrageous. The Government is pulling every lever to drive economic growth, and by opening access to more quality products, we have the potential to cut thousands of dollars off the cost of building a home. More choice means more competition, which, along with innovation, will help to put downward pressure on prices, giving Kiwis options to suit their budget when building or renovating.

Dr Carlos Cheung: What building products will become easier to access in New Zealand because of this policy?

Hon CHRIS PENK: A hundred and thirty international standards released yesterday cover some of the most important elements of the materials used in homes—for example, plasterboard, cladding, windows, and external doors. I note that we have some of the most expensive plasterboard in the world, with Kiwis paying around 40 to 60 percent more than in comparable countries. Thanks to these changes, plasterboard made in Australia, the UK, the EU, the United States, and, yes, still in New Zealand will be far easier to use here.

Dr Carlos Cheung: What feedback has the Minister received about these changes?

Hon CHRIS PENK: The feedback so far has been overwhelmingly positive. Registered Master Builders chief executive Ankit Sharma called this a big step forward for builders facing rising costs and a shortage of key materials. He has said that “By allowing overseas products that meet standards to be used more readily, we can improve supply chain resilience, reduce delays, and ultimately deliver more homes, faster and more affordably.” I would also like to acknowledge all the parties in the House that supported the passage of the primary legislation allowing this regime, including the coalition Government parties but also parties from across the political aisle. This Government has many more steps planned in addition to make it easier and affordable to build in this country.

Question No. 11—Prime Minister

11. 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: Who is his Government here to serve—

Hon Members: Whoa!

Chlöe Swarbrick: —banks, supermarkets—

SPEAKER: Right, stop—just stop. Someone is going to go from the backbench very shortly, because questions are heard in silence.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Are you seeking nominations?

SPEAKER: No, I’m not seeking nominations, but if you want to self-nominate, I’ll certainly oblige.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Who is his Government here to serve: banks, supermarkets, and electricity companies making billions in profit, or regular, hard-working New Zealanders?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, as the member will be well aware, we are here to support all New Zealanders, and we’re giving particular help to low and middle income working Kiwis. We’re doing that by offering tax relief for the first time in 14 years. It’s not a deeply ideological concept, but one that is the right thing to do, given the inflation that people have encountered. We are expanding the thresholds and the coverage of things like FamilyBoost for working families who have early childcare costs. Most importantly, we’re running the economy well, because if you care about low and middle income working New Zealanders, you run the economy well so that you don’t have high inflation and high interest rates.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does the Prime Minister take responsibility for the 27,000 fewer jobs and 22,000 more people unemployed than at this time last year?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, as I’ve explained before, what happens is that when you increase Government spending by 84 percent, it drives up domestic inflation. The only tool that you’re then left with is to drive up interest rates. When interest rates go up, businesses actually have got high interest rates and high inflation costs, and, as a result, they get squeezed, the economy goes into recession, and people lose their jobs. That is the unfortunate thing when you don’t run an economy well—that is the consequence. The people who suffer are low and middle income working people, who the other side of the House used to care about but don’t.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Will the Government guarantee a job for every person that it has made unemployed?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, we are building an economy to create jobs. We are doing that by making sure we are getting kids taught the basics brilliantly so that they can access high-paying jobs. We’re doing that by making reforms to our science sector to make sure we create value-added products and services that we can sell to the world; we are getting rid of the barnacles that led to over-compliance and higher costs by getting rid of the red tape and the green tape that’s slowing New Zealand up; and we are making sure that we are expanding—doubling—trade and attracting investment to New Zealand, as well as building modern, reliable infrastructure. Those are the things that will lift the collective living standards of all New Zealanders.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Why is his Government forcing small businesses into paying bank interchange fees instead of the banks, which are making billions in profit absorbing it?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I’d just say to the member that the Commerce Commission came out last week and identified $90 million worth of reductions that merchants are charged by, say, Mastercard and Visa. We know there has been excessive charging going on. We’re proud of the fact that we’re removing fees and surcharges for New Zealand consumers, and, actually, if there are any other charges, we expect it to be built into pricing, just like it is for everything else.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Will the Government ban banks from charging interchange fees?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, again, what you’ve seen is a Government that’s actually done something about it by lowering the interchange fees by $90 million—the fees that are charged by Mastercard and Visa—and making sure that $65 million of excessive charges that retailers often pass on to consumers that have no bearing to the cost of those transaction fees is taken away. We’re proud of the fact that we’re taking away fees and surcharges on debit cards, credit cards, and EFTPOS payments.

Question No. 12—Housing

12. to the Associate Minister of Housing: Does he stand by his statement, “This Government takes homelessness seriously”; if not, why not?

Āna—yes.

Hon Peeni Henare: How can he say that the Government is taking homelessness seriously when homelessness in Tāmaki-makau-rau has increased by 90 percent in just nine months under this Government?

Hon TAMA POTAKA: No one in this Government or, indeed, this House wants to see Kiwis living without shelter or on the streets, or living homeless. That’s why we have undertaken a number of initiatives—both existing and new initiatives—to ensure that we meet these challenges head on, whether or not that’s cost-proofing the transitional housing and Housing First costs that were not cost-proofed before this Government came into administration; the Going for Housing Growth initiatives that Minister Bishop is leading; Priority One and seeing over 2,000 children come out of emergency motels; or whether it is the 1,500 community housing provider houses that we are supporting, the $500 million of support that we continue to support with transitional housing, or other things. Yes, we are not perfect. However, we are confronting these issues head-on and making sure we remain agile to some of the key homelessness concerns that confront many Kiwis.

Hon Peeni Henare: What targeted measures will he implement to support rangatahi or wāhine Māori, who the Auckland Council has shown are overrepresented among the homeless in Tāmaki-makau-rau?

Hon TAMA POTAKA: Yes, and I’d acknowledge that there are some cohorts in our communities—our rangatahi included—that have been disproportionately represented in housing deprivation and homelessness stats for many, many years. We continue to provide a whole range of supports, whether or not that’s rangatahi supported accommodation, transitional housing, or other avenues for those cohorts in those communities that confront these serious housing and homelessness challenges. We are also very determined to ensure that more granny flats and papa kāinga are enabled through national environmental standards changes that can help accommodate some of these folks and whānau members who are in serious housing need.

Hon Peeni Henare: Should the Government’s housing and homelessness strategy be grounded in Te Tiriti o Waitangi principles, as recommended by the Salvation Army and the Waitangi Tribunal?

Hon TAMA POTAKA: There are many views around how we can better confront the homelessness and serious housing deprivation challenges. On this side of the House, we are absolutely committed to ensure that we generate more supply so more Kiwis—Māori, rangatahi, wāhine, and otherwise—can be housed.

Hon Peeni Henare: Who is the Government governing for: the tamariki and whānau who are homeless and freezing, or the landlords that received $3 billion worth of tax cuts?

Hon Paul Goldsmith: We govern for everyone.

Hon TAMA POTAKA: Can I riff off Minister Goldsmith—we govern for all New Zealanders.

SPEAKER: That concludes oral questions. I’ll take 30 seconds while those who need to leave the House for other business do so quietly, and today I’ll be particularly watching for people who decide to have a conversation on the way.