Oral Questions

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

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Yes, and especially our action to promote tourism. Tourism is an absolutely critical industry for this great country of ours. It drives almost $38 billion, employs almost 200,000 people up and down the country. And on this side of the House, we know that, actually, growing tourism is a good thing for economic growth, and a good thing for economic growth is more money in the back pockets of Kiwis. So we’re going all out on tourism: digital nomad visas, which the member supported then didn’t support. We’re going all out on a stronger presence in key markets like Australia, and a $30 million investment in conservation tourism. So we’re not stopping there; there’ll be more to say on tourism in the coming weeks, and I’m sure the member will look forward to supporting us and the work that we’re doing to drive the tourism sector. And we don’t want him saying no to tourism.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Does his Government’s “Everyone must go!” strategy include driving highly qualified Kiwis to Australia, particularly in light of recent complaints from Engineering New Zealand that his Government’s delay to infrastructure projects are driving hundreds of engineers across the Tasman?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I thank the member for his question, and I acknowledge that, under his last year in Government, there were 43,000 New Zealand citizens that left New Zealand. That number has crept up—up to 47,000 in the last year—and that is why this Government’s working incredibly hard on improving the economy so that there are opportunities for people here. But it is not helped—it is not helped—when you’ve got a Labour Government that bans industries and, actually, Kiwis are leaving New Zealand to go work in mining and oil and gas in Australia. That doesn’t work.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Was Engineering New Zealand chief executive, Dr Richard Templer, wrong when he said, “The shutdown of education rebuilds, the shutdown of hospital builds and upgrades, the slow down on roading, the changes in the Three Waters space has meant that … New Zealand constructors, the people who build the roads, waters network[s] and buildings have all had to look for work elsewhere and that has seen people heading overseas … in significant numbers.”?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Isn’t it ironic that the member that caused the grief in the New Zealand economy is now criticising us for trying to fix it? And what I’d say is that there are some good signs. There are no more phantom projects any more for engineers to work on. No more Auckland light rail, Let’s Get Wellington Moving—all those kinds of projects. There’s $33 billion in the national transport plan; there’s $148 billion in the Infrastructure Commission pipeline. There’s work coming and it’s starting to happen. We’re getting roads built: Brougham St’s starting, Hawke’s Bay’s started. That’s what’s going on.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Was his “Everyone must go!” strategy inspired by the fact that, under his Government’s leadership, the number of people leaving New Zealand has reached a record high, with 128,000 people giving up and simply leaving, last year alone.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, as I just explained in my first answer, net migration has moved from 43,000 to 47,000 for New Zealand citizens. That is why we are working so incredibly hard on building the economy. But I’ll tell you what it’s not helped by: it’s not helped by a Labour Party not supporting tax relief for working New Zealanders. It’s not supported by a Labour Party not supporting fast-track legislation to keep people in work. That’s what’s important.

Hon Chris Bishop: Can the Prime Minister confirm that the latest quarterly infrastructure pipeline report from the independent Infrastructure Commission confirms $108 billion of funded projects under way and in planning from central government, local government, and the private sector—up $8 billion in the last quarter?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Yes, I can, and what I can confirm is the $33 billion in the National Transport Plan as well. There is activity and things happening in this country. We’re not going to do phantom projects and Post-it notes and talk about mythical things.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Does his “Everyone must go!” strategy apply to the leadership of the New Zealand health system, and how does an exodus of that valuable expertise improve the health outcomes for Kiwis?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I can tell you what this Government is doing: we’re embracing “Everything must go!”, like high inflation, like high interest rates, like wasteful spending, like cycle bridges, like Let’s Get Wellington Moving. We’re saying everything must go, including gang members going up, violent crime going up, retail crime going up. And who was the police Minister for five years?

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Does his “Everyone must go!” strategy extend to those in emergency housing; and why can’t anyone in his Government explain where they’ve gone, given increasing reports of homelessness, with the Downtown Community Ministry reporting a 40 percent increase in homelessness under his watch?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, that is rich coming from that member, because that Government presided over an absolute shameful record on emergency housing. When we came to Government, there was 3,200 households living in motels—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Right. Sorry, Prime Minister. That’s absolutely enough. I know that the Prime Minister’s questions generally elicit a lot more, you’d say, interjection, but not the constant barrage that’s going on. The Opposition wants answers—listen to them.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Why does his “Everyone must go!” mantra seem to apply to everyone except for David Seymour, who referred a victim of sexual abuse by the ACT Party president to a lawyer rather than to the police, intervened in a police murder investigation, and drove a Land Rover up the front steps of Parliament, and yet is being rewarded with a promotion to Deputy Prime Minister?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I’d just say we took the public approach to the Labour Party at the last election, where they said, “Everyone must go.”, and, actually, the member is the only member who hasn’t got anywhere else to go. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: Wait on. Hey—listen. This is the week where someone, clearly, is going to go for not listening to the instruction to keep it seemly. Can I please have Rawiri Waititi.

Rawiri Waititi: Does he believe that Operation Trolley, executed in Rotorua, was a good use of taxpayer money?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Absolutely.

Rawiri Waititi: How much did it cost?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I encourage the member to direct his question to the relevant Minister.

Rawiri Waititi: Point of order, Mr Speaker. It’s on the record, the Prime Minister saying he absolutely believed it was a good use of taxpayer money, but he doesn’t know how much it cost.

SPEAKER: Well, I’m sure that throughout the Budget documents there are lots of figures that are a good use of public money that are not at the immediate recall of the Prime Minister.

Rawiri Waititi: How can you say you support it if you don’t know how much it cost?

SPEAKER: It wasn’t a question on notice—it wasn’t a question on notice. You’ve got to be reasonable about that.

Question No. 2—Prime Minister

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

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

Yes, and especially our $30 million investment in conservation, which is designed to boost biodiversity and also tourism across New Zealand. Our tourism industry thrives on our very strong natural assets, and it’s critical that we continue to invest in those assets. I thank Minister Potaka for doing exactly that. And that’s why it’s fantastic to see a range of investments being made up and down and across the country throughout the conservation estate. This is evidence that we can actually grow tourism, and we’re going to continue to do that.

Hon Marama Davidson: How can he be proud of that $30 million funding announcement for conservation tourism when, in the past year alone, the Department of Conservation (DOC) has been forced to make $47.2 million in cuts, so that, overall, this announcement doesn’t even cover the hole that this Government created?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I’m actually incredibly proud of that investment, and I’d hope that the member would get behind it. Surely the member is saying yes to $30 million going in for this particular task.

Hon Marama Davidson: Will he commit to more funding for DOC in Budget 2025 in light of recent information concluding the department would need $2.3 billion annually to protect biodiversity?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: You’ll have to wait till the Budget.

Hon Marama Davidson: Does he think a $30 million announcement is sufficient, considering that tourism on public conservation land alone is worth around $3.4 billion a year?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I’m sure there is more we can do, but it’s a great start, and I’d hope the member would encourage it and be thankful for it.

Hon David Seymour: Does the Prime Minister agree with the member that spending more money is a goal in itself, or does he alternatively believe that the Government’s objective is to get greater value out of spending less money, just as every firm, farm, and family has had to for the last few years?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: That’s exactly right; it’s all about value for money, and that’s what we’re doing.

Hon Marama Davidson: Why is he comfortable with his Government only investing a mere 0.88 percent of the value of tourism on conservation land at the same time as it is enabling more mining in Aotearoa?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I reject those two things, and those two legs to that question, but what I’d just say, in respect to the investment in the conservation area, is I’m proud of our investment. We’ve done a good job making sure we open up a new Great Walk, the Hump Ridge Track. That’s fantastic. We’ve got some protection cross-party around the Hauraki Gulf protection. We’ve reopened Cathedral Cove. That’s all good stuff.

Hon Marama Davidson: Does he expect this loose-change announcement to distract the New Zealand public from the fact that his Government continues to put commercial interests over protecting te taiao for future generations?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: And in that question, you have it, don’t you? That’s exactly the mentality; it’s just loose change, $30 million! Well, actually, it’s the taxpayers’ money. We’re getting value for money. We want to grow our economy so we can invest more in the environment. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: I’ll tell you what, you can carry on that conversation outside in a few minutes. I keep getting these letters saying, “You keep threatening to send people out but don’t do it.” It’s because of my good nature, but it’s really at its end.

Question No. 3—Finance

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

I’ve seen two recent releases from BNZ and Business New Zealand: the BNZ-Business New Zealand Performance of Manufacturing Index and the BNZ-Business New Zealand Performance of Services Index. In terms of manufacturing, the index lifted sharply in January to its highest level since September 2022. And while, of course, individual manufacturers will have their own sets of circumstances, manufacturing on the whole is now expanding after 22 months of contraction. The BNZ describes this as “a positive start to 2025, with the manufacturing sector shifting out of reverse and into first gear.”

Paulo Garcia: What did the Performance of Services Index show?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: The Performance of Services Index also moved into expansionary territory after an extended period of contraction. That means the services sector, the largest part of our economy as a whole, is growing, although modestly. Both the manufacturing and services sector results are consistent with a pick-up in economic activity at the beginning of 2025, supporting Kiwi jobs and incomes.

Paulo Garcia: What other recent economic reports has she seen?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: I’ve seen a report from Westpac that says that dairy incomes look set to hit record highs in nominal and, perhaps, real terms. This is good news for supporting New Zealanders’ jobs and incomes—go the farmers! Yesterday, Statistics New Zealand released its latest international travel stats, and this showed that there was a 12 percent increase in overseas visitors to New Zealand in the last year, the highest number since COVID. We want more tourists coming to New Zealand, opening their wallets, spending money in local businesses, supporting Kiwi jobs, and growing Kiwis’ incomes.

Paulo Garcia: When is the next major economic release?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Tomorrow, the Reserve Bank releases its quarterly Monetary Policy Statement (MPS). The MPS will include the bank’s view of the global and domestic economy, its latest forecasts, and the Monetary Policy Committee’s decision on the official cash rate (OCR). Decisions about the OCR are, of course, for the committee but the market and most economists are expecting a reduction in the OCR of 50 basis points. That would take the OCR down to 3.75 percent, supporting lower retail interest rates which, in turn, support a growing economy, jobs, and incomes for New Zealanders.

Question No. 4—Workplace Relations and Safety

4. to the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety: What announcements has she made about restoring balance in employment relations?

I’ve announced a plan to reintroduce pay deductions for partial strikes. This will be discussed at select committee this week. This Government has committed to this change because we need to restore balance to the rights and consequences of collective bargaining. If workers are partially striking by refusing to do their normal work, why should they get paid a normal wage? I’m also restoring balance to personal grievances by removing entitlements to remedies in situations where the employee is found to have contributed to the personal grievance. For too long, employees have been able to claim compensation for hurt and humiliation even if they were dismissed for serious misconduct. It’s no wonder I’ve heard from so many employers who are concerned the personal grievance system is unbalanced in favour of workers.

SPEAKER: I’m sure the future supplementary answers will be slightly shorter.

Laura McClure: How will the changes you have announced to personal grievances benefit workers?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: My changes will give employers confidence that they can act to remove workers in cases of serious misconduct in order to keep other workers safe, without fear that doing so will end up costing tens of thousands of dollars in personal grievance compensation. I’ve heard one case where a worker was intimidating and abusive towards another worker, yet the employer felt like they were between a rock and a hard place as they feared the intimidating worker might raise a personal grievance and be reinstated if they were dismissed.

Laura McClure: How will the changes you’ve announced to enable pay deductions for partial strikes benefit the community?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: Many of the examples of partial strikes we’ve seen in the past were designed to intentionally cause disruption to the public. Often, it’s the community who loses out or are caught in the middle when partial strikes occur. When teachers refused to teach certain year groups on particular days, it was parents who paid the price by having to take unplanned leave from work in order to take care of their kids who were rostered home, not to mention the cost of lost learning for the students. When hospital-based nuclear medicine technologists limited the number of scans completed each day, it was patients waiting for their results who suffered. If communities and employers bear the negative consequences of partial strike action, it’s only fair that employees do too.

Question No. 5—Finance

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

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

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Does announcing $19 million of additional spending for conservation make up for the $125 million that was cut from conservation in her Budget?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Did the member just say the $125 billion that was cut from conservation spending? Because that would be a ludicrous figure to use in this House.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Does announcing $500,000 of additional spending for tourism marketing make up for the $20 million that was cut from the “marketing New Zealand as a tourist destination” fund at Budget 2024?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Well, the Government stands by its decision to invest in effective marketing campaigns to bring tourists to New Zealand because that supports New Zealand jobs and incomes. On the other side of the House, they’ve got to make up their mind. Should we be investing more in attracting tourists, as these questions seem to suggest, or does she not think tourism is a good idea, as other of her members have suggested? I don’t know which way is up or down with you guys.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: How does cutting $24 million from the New Zealand Cycle Trails, Great Rides, and the tourism recovery fund help promote New Zealand as a tourism destination?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Well, investment in cycle trails continues. As a Government, we’ve made it very clear that where we make investments, we want to make sure they’re having the biggest impact for New Zealanders. Taxpayers deserve to know that when a dollar of theirs that’s been taken out of their household budget is being spent by Ministers, it is going to its absolute best value and impact.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Why is she spending international visitor levy funding to attract tourists from Australia that do not pay the international visitor levy?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Well, we’ve been very clear that we want the international visitor levy to support the tourism sector growing in a way that supports New Zealanders and so it’s our view that, right now, getting tourism numbers up is important. It’s important for every New Zealand community who has restaurants, cafes, or tourism operators that need more people coming through their doors; it’s important for all those people who would like a job but can’t get one because those businesses haven’t got the tourism numbers coming through the door; and it’s important for businesses in the future, who we want to see investing in these industries and paying their employees more. We stand by our decision to support tourism growth.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Does cutting major Government spending, then announcing new spending at a fraction of what was cut, count as new spending?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: As I have outlined to the member, our focus is on ensuring that where we have dollars to invest, we are investing them for their highest impact. That means putting them into areas which will actually get tourism back to the levels it was before it was decimated after the COVID-19 border closures, and that means ensuring that we’re promoting our tourism sector effectively offshore.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Could I ask the Minister of Finance to please put the Labour Party at ease and let them know that “Everybody must go” is not our view of the Labour Party?

SPEAKER: Yeah, no—that’s not a question that will be answered in the House.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: It’s a request.

SPEAKER: Well, no. Well, it might be a request, but—

Rt Hon Winston Peters: What’s wrong with that?

SPEAKER: Because it’s question time and you ask Ministers about their responsibility, and I don’t think she’s got too much responsibility for that.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: She’s a nice person. She wants to help.

SPEAKER: Oh, she’s a lovely person, but I’m sure that the Opposition know what her sentiments are on all matters relating to them.

Question No. 6—Justice

6. to the Minister of Justice: How is the Government progressing with its plan to restore stronger consequences for crime?

It’s progressing very well. Having banned gang patches and restored three strikes, the next step is the Sentencing (Reform) Amendment Bill. This gives sweeping changes to put more serious offenders in prison for longer, and to prevent them from creating new victims, and is getting one step closer to becoming law, set down for second reading this afternoon. This Government promised to restore real consequences for crime, and that is what we are doing.

Tom Rutherford: What will the Sentencing (Reform) Amendment Bill do to restore stronger consequences for crime?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: The Sentencing (Reform) Amendment Bill reduces the ability for judges to massively reduce sentences for convicted criminals. There’ll be a cap on total sentencing discounts of 40 percent, and there will no longer be repeated discounts for remorse. You can’t be remorseful repeatedly. The bill also makes a number of other changes, including the addition of a range of new aggravating factors, such as for adults who offend in crimes alongside young people, such as in ram raids.

Tom Rutherford: Why is it important to restore stronger consequences for crime?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Well, because New Zealanders deserve to feel safe in their communities. The Government is concerned that in recent years, the courts have imposed fewer prison sentences while the prevalence of serious crime increased. That’s why the Government set an ambitious target of seeing a reduction of 20,000 fewer victims of assault, robbery, and sexual assault by 2029. The data has long lead times, but early results from our work have been encouraging. There have been 24,000 fewer victims over the year ending October 2024 compared to the year ending June 2024.

Tom Rutherford: What other actions is the Government taking to restore stronger consequences for crime?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Well, we’ve introduced legislation to make stalking an illegal and jailable offence. New laws are providing police with additional tools to disrupt gangs, and we’re already making a mark on our communities through that. We’re currently considering proposals submitted by the excellent ministerial advisory group led by Sunny Kaushal to combat retail crime. Indeed, there’s much more work to be done.

Tākuta Ferris: Given the three CEOs in Justice don’t believe that they have the capacity to reduce overrepresentation of Māori in either Justice, Police, or Corrections, will the Minister commit to setting them targets that they must achieve?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Well, look, our primary target is to reduce the number of victims of crime, and that is what this Government is focused on. As that member is well aware, sadly, Māori are more likely to be victims of crime than the general public. That is why we are absolutely focused on reducing the number of victims of crime, and that is the best thing we can do for Māori in the criminal justice system.

Question No. 7—Children

7. to the Minister for Children: Does she stand by all her statements and actions in relation to serious youth offenders and the military-style academies?

Yes, in the context in which they were made at the time. I especially stand by my actions to provide funding of $30.6 million over four years to continue the fast-track youth offending programme and extend the programme to 14- to 17-year-olds, which will contribute to Government Target 3, a 15 percent reduction in the total number of children and young people with serious and persistent offending behaviour.

Hon Willow-Jean Prime: What are her measures of success for the entire 12-month military-style academy (MSA) pilot?

Hon KAREN CHHOUR: My measure of its success is around making sure that our communities are safe, and we are also putting in place opportunities for young people to be the best version of themselves. What they do with that is ultimately up to them.

Hon Willow-Jean Prime: Does she agree with the Children’s Commissioner, who said, in terms of what works, that it is not putting young people into youth justice institutions for longer periods of time, and, if not, why not?

Hon KAREN CHHOUR: I think we have to take a reality check here. These young people right now, currently, under the current legislation, are ending up in youth justice facilities. They are repeat, serious youth offenders who to qualify to be part of the MSA programme must have committed two crimes with a sentence of 10 years or more. They will end up in a youth justice facility anyway. What I am doing is making sure that when that does happen, we’re asking the questions of what we can do better for these young people.

Hon Willow-Jean Prime: How does the Government know already that, as the Prime Minister said yesterday, having longer-length residential facility time would actually be more useful?

Hon KAREN CHHOUR: What I can say is that from the first report back, it showed that there was a positive response of the in-residence, where young people were expressing that it was helpful for them. This may be an option moving forward. That’s why the legislation allows flexibility to be able to make this programme work for them.

Hon Willow-Jean Prime: Are she and the Prime Minister withholding information about their pilot until they have passed the legislation, and then it will be too late and it will already be in law to lock young people up for longer?

Hon KAREN CHHOUR: I refer back to a previous answer. These young people were going to end up in a youth justice facility anyway. What we are doing is making sure that we are asking the right questions and putting the right support in place, not only for those young people but for their whānau and in the community so that they can be the best versions of themselves.

Question No. 8—Regional Development

8. to the Minister for Regional Development: What recent announcements has he made regarding steps the Government is taking to support regional development?

In line with the pro-growth agenda of our Government, I recently had the pleasure of opening a new motorway interchange, building on 20 years of long-term planning and infrastructure development. I want to acknowledge Quayside Holdings, and in particular Sir Paul Adams, who over 23 years ago had a vision to grow that part of New Zealand. And with the $18 million that was allocated several years ago, it was a pleasure—with Tapuika, the tangata whenua—to open the infrastructure.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Oh, who did that? Which Government did that?

Jamie Arbuckle: Why was the Government—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: No, no, just—hang on. Start again.

Jamie Arbuckle: Why was the Government’s funding to support this interchange so critical?

Hon SHANE JONES: Of course, this takes me back to the time when New Zealand First not only led the narrative, but it’s amazing to see the concrete evidence of historical decisions that are going to open up over 148 hectares of land for industrial development—land that will be freed up as a consequence of fast-track legislation; land that includes whenua Māori belonging to a tribe called Tapuika, who hail from Polynesia. Sadly, I won’t elaborate, because the leader of Māori Party is currently up there meddling in Polynesia.

Jamie Arbuckle: How will this project benefit the wider region?

Hon SHANE JONES: The number of people employed in this project was well over 200—delivered on time. But we have greater ambitions for the area, and it was a pleasure to share the speeches with the Hon Todd McClay from Rotorua, and that’s how things should happen. It shouldn’t be just the glory of the Matua, but spread around to the people who have actually supported my narrative day after day and not tried to shoot down fast track, not tried to shoot down the application of common sense in infrastructure development.

Jamie Arbuckle: Supplementary?

SPEAKER: Yes, we’ll have the question, but the answer might just dodge the protestations of humility, which the House already understands.

Jamie Arbuckle: What other steps is the Government taking to support regional economic development?

Hon SHANE JONES: It’s important that the House note that the value of the fishing industry is well over $1.6 billion. A part of that broader marine industry is aquaculture that has been turbocharged as a consequence of extending marine farming permits in those parts of New Zealand where it’s a vital industry. So it comes to me as very bleak news—and I will look into it this afternoon—that the Marlborough District Council is meddling and trying to impose their view of the law on marine farming. Marine farming represents the interests of mothers and fathers and households, and we’re not going to tolerate bureaucrats and that particular council repeating the perfidy of what they did with seabed and foreshore.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Look, on this project, enabled by the Provincial Growth Fund, did he hear Chris Hipkins just shout across the House, “Which Government did that?”; and could he please, for the umpteenth time, remind them of who did what, where, and when?

SPEAKER: Well, OK, but make it brief because it’s a bit of—he can reflect on it, but it’s history.

Hon SHANE JONES: In line with my approach, I shall be succinct and pithy. Look no further than the coalition agreement of 2017, and I would direct similar attention to 2023.

Question No. 9—Tourism and Hospitality

9. to the Minister for Tourism and Hospitality: What recent announcements has she made about increasing visitor numbers to New Zealand?

On Sunday, the Prime Minister and I announced a new campaign with Tourism New Zealand, encouraging Australians to pick New Zealand for their next holiday. Tourism is a crucial part of our Government’s focus on economic growth, and this campaign is the first investment in our tourism boost package to bring international visitor numbers back to pre-COVID numbers. More visitors mean more full tables in restaurants, more bookings for local accommodation, more jobs across the country, and an overall stronger economy. A Kiwi holiday isn’t just great for visitors; it’s great for New Zealand, and we’re letting our Aussie mates know that we’re ready and waiting to welcome them now.

Carl Bates: How will targeting Australians improve overall visitor numbers?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: Just this week, new stats show a 12 percent increase in international visitor arrivals compared to December 2023. That’s an 85 percent recovery of international visitor arrivals compared to 2019. Visitor numbers from Australia are currently at about 90 percent, compared to 2019, so we know there’s more room to grow. Around 4 million Australians are already actively considering a holiday in New Zealand, and this campaign will build on this momentum and encourage more of our Aussie neighbours to book now and come on over.

Carl Bates: What benefits does she expect to see as a result of this campaign?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: The benefits of growing these visitor numbers will reach beyond our cities and into our regions: 93 percent of New Zealanders see benefits from increased tourism. And it isn’t just the tourism dollars; they know as soon as someone lands on our shores, they start paying GST. Every time a tourist comes to New Zealand and spends money at a local shop, buys dinner at a local café, it’s good for jobs, it’s good for growth, and it’s good for the incomes of New Zealand families. When tourism grows, so does our economy.

Carl Bates: What feedback has she received on this announcement?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: The feedback has been fantastic. Everybody is talking about it. Hospitality New Zealand is excited to get more people enjoying New Zealand hospitality, in the pivotal role that it plays in supporting the Government’s economic growth agenda. New Zealand Airports Association has said, “This is a critical first step in growing tourism and ensuring its benefits are distributed across the economy. Increased visitor numbers translate to more spending in hospitality, greater regional development, and stronger air cargo capacity,”. Australia is the focus of this campaign, and you can expect the same energy and enthusiasm as we announce the rest of our tourism boost.

Cushla Tangaere-Manuel: How does she address the concerns of the community of Tekapō, who are already facing infrastructure deficits and whose ratepayers will face an inequitable burden in covering the cost of this Government’s so-called growth agenda?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: As I’ve said, there are a couple of areas—Tekapō is one—where I know the mayor is concerned about it. But the reality is the majority of New Zealand recognise that we want more visitors; 93 percent of New Zealanders realise how it’s good for New Zealand, and they know it’s a critical part of growing the wealth of New Zealand.

Question No. 10—Police

10. to the Minister of Police: Does he stand by his statement that being involved in organised crime and peddling drugs is not going to be tolerated in this country, and it’s going to be much tougher to do any of those things; if so, why?

Yeah, absolutely, I do. We’ve heard from political parties and commentators that the gang legislation wouldn’t work and that gangs were too strong and wouldn’t comply. Gang apologists came forward, wringing their hands over gang members’ rights. This Government is focused on victims’ rights. The gang legislation has been in force for nearly three months and has changed the way gangs are policed in New Zealand. Police now control our streets, not the gangs. We have seen entire chapters of gangs dismantled by police, public gatherings policed in a way where law-abiding members of the public have their rights protected, gang members blocked from entering our country, and record drug seizures through combined efforts across Government. There is more work to be done, but I was pleased to note in recent reporting late last year, or last year, that for the first time since 2018, we have seen an annual drop in violent crime.

SPEAKER: Good, OK. We’ll go for the concise answers—they’re generally the best—and similarly with the questions.

Hon Ginny Andersen: Is he concerned that gangs are controlling streets in Auckland, given there has been an increase of over 9,000 grams of methamphetamine consumed a week—a surge of 129 percent in just one year?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: No, I’m not concerned at all about the gangs controlling the streets in Auckland, because the police are doing an outstanding job in policing the gangs in Auckland, and that’s certainly the feedback that I get. I want to acknowledge my Associate Minister of Police and the Minister of Customs. We’re working very closely together on a strategy around stopping and preventing the supply chain of methamphetamine coming into our country, through her transnational crime strategy, and I’d have to say that our commissioner is in Australia as I speak, working with the commissioners over there to make sure that we reinforce our borders even more.

Hon Ginny Andersen: Does he think it makes New Zealanders feel safer to know that the police’s national drug waste-water testing programme for quarter three in 2024 shows methamphetamine use skyrocketing to its highest recorded level in New Zealand’s history?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Well, I don’t know whether that’s dealers dumping methamphetamine or not. We know that we have got a problem in this country with methamphetamine. We know that it’s a wrecking ball through people’s lives in every part of society, and we’re being very clear, as the incoming Government, that we are taking action on that, and we are taking action on that. The first part of that is rolling out tough laws to allow our police to get on top of the gangs. They’ve been in place for three months, and we’re already seeing outstanding results.

Hon Ginny Andersen: What action will he take to address the Salvation Army’s state of the nation finding that police waste-water testing shows that meth consumption surged to 32.4 kilos per week in quarter four of 2024, more than doubling the average of the previous four quarters, and incurring a weekly social harm of $34 million, while charges and convictions for illicit drugs have continued to plateau?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Well, I’ll tell the member what action we’ve taken. The Auckland CBD, when we came into Government, was an absolute shambles. People didn’t feel safe being out on the streets at night, there were drug deals happening on street corners, and it was the first place that businesses coming to New Zealand often touched our country. So I’ll tell you what I did: I brought together a stakeholders group, with everyone working together: residents and ratepayers groups, business associations, social service providers, Government agencies, and the police. We’re making big progress and we’ve made massive steps in terms of making sure that our CBD is now a safer place, that we’re getting drug dealers off the streets, and that we’re starting to deal with the exact issues that proliferated under that previous Government.

SPEAKER: Now, we’re just going to calm the farm, again—too much.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Can I ask the Minister by way of reflection and on his last answer: has he taken up from a former police Minister—namely, the Hon Stuart Nash, who was getting numbers up, and here we are again—rather than the previous Minister, who had big talk but no resources to help the police in the first place?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Well, it’s a good question. I think the Hon Stuart Nash was the last police Minister they had who actually cared about front-line police officers, and I think the feedback from him is that he’s very supportive of the work we’ve been doing. And I would restate again for the House that when we came into Government 12 months ago, people that lived and worked in the Auckland CBD did not want to go out in the streets after nine. We have changed that. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: Shanan Halbert—when your colleagues are ready for you.

Shanan Halbert: Does he liken the actions of Destiny Church at Auckland Pride last weekend the same as those of organised crime groups such as gangs; if not, why not?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Well, I’ve been very clear: I condemn the actions of Destiny Church in interrupting the gay pride parade the other day. We’ve always got to protect the right to peaceful protest and speech in this country, but not when it overrides the rights of other people. So I’ve condemned that. Destiny Church is not above the law, and I expect the police to investigate and treat it that way.

Shanan Halbert: How many of the 119 hate-motivated incidents of offending against the rainbow community that were reported between 24 September and 30 November 2024 were carried out by organised crime groups such as gangs, and what has he done to stop them from happening again?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Well, I’d ask the member to put that into a written question for me—I don’t have those numbers—but I’d say this: I’m extremely proud—

Shanan Halbert: You gave me those numbers.

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Well, you’re asking me how many gangs were involved in those crimes. I don’t have the number in terms of how many gangs were involved in those crimes, but the one thing I can tell you is this: regardless of who the offending is against, I’m very proud of our police service and the fact that they take assaults seriously, and they will follow up and they will investigate.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Point of order, Mr Speaker. How proper is it for a member to ask a question and, when the question is being answered, shout out and hold up the paper to the Minister, “You gave us the numbers.”? So he’s asking a question about numbers he already had in his hand. How professional, in a political sense and a parliamentary sense, is that?

Hon Dr Megan Woods: Measure twice, cut once.

SPEAKER: We’re on a point of order. I can’t be expected to make an assessment of any member’s ability to assess the information they’ve got and then make claims about it, and I know that the Hon Mark Mitchell made the point that the information that was asked for was not on those papers.

Hon Ginny Andersen: How does he hope to make New Zealanders feel safer when it has become easier for gangs to peddle drugs on our streets and when communities in Auckland continue to be intimidated by people wearing patches?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Well, we’ve made sentencing tougher. We’ve returned the three-strikes legislation. We’ve just brought in very tough gang legislation to allow the police to be far more effective in dealing with the gangs, and the reality of it is that gangs are the driving force behind the organisation, the global networks, the importation, and the distribution of drugs.

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, and especially our action to build the infrastructure that Kiwis need to get ahead. We know the big difference that our roads of national significance have made to communities up and down the country—whether it’s the Waikato Expressway or the Kāpiti Expressway. That’s why it’s so exciting to see that construction on Takitimu North Link stage one—a four-lane expressway between Tauranga and Te Puna—is now past the halfway point. So we know there’s $33 billion set aside in our National Land Transport Programme. The good news is more regions are going to get more roads that will benefit investment, drive growth, and keep money in Kiwis’ pockets. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: Before the member asks the question, both sides are going to calm down. The Government affirmations of the Prime Minister’s statements are not elucidating on the answer he’s actually given at all.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does extracting and burning coal make climate change better or worse?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I’d just say, having an oil and gas ban that that member signed up for, which has led us to import in huge amounts of Indonesian coal—

Hon Dr Megan Woods: Oh, that’s rubbish!

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: —to keep our lights on when we don’t have rain and wind in this economy isn’t good. We would like it to be gas—

Hon Dr Megan Woods: Show some leadership.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: —because that’s better than coal. But, actually, when you’ve got a renewable energy mix at 85 to 87 percent, you need to keep the lights on and we’re not going to have the situation we had last winter.

SPEAKER: The member over here needs to bid for a question if she wants to keep making those contributions, which are unhelpful to the actual questioner’s line of questioning.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Is coal a mineral?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, what I can tell you is coal, in the case of not having gas and not having renewables working, is an important aspect of our energy plan.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Why has he added coal to the critical minerals list when coal is not a mineral but a fossil fuel?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I mean, I think the Minister’s done a very good job, actually, identifying 37 critical minerals, of which 21 of them we think are actually in this country. Importantly, coal and metallurgical coal and gold are actually really important for our mining industry.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Is he aware that the coal set to be mined by just one of his fast-track projects would increase emissions by 66.5 million tonnes, meanwhile his latest international commitment to reduce emissions is just 42 million tonnes?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I just say to that member: the bumper sticker of the Labour-Greens Government of ending the oil and gas ban led to wholesale electricity prices of $1,500 last winter. That actually put huge pressure on businesses and people lost their jobs on the back of that. So, actually, a consistent, good energy policy that actually helps grow our economy, doubles the amount of renewables we have in it, but keeps our lights on with affordable, abundant electricity is exactly what we’re doing in this Government.

Hon Shane Jones: Can the Prime Minister confirm, as a consequence of the cancellation of the oil and gas industry, that over $1 million worth of coal will be imported from Indonesia to enable people to actually enjoy energy security this year?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Absolutely. Again, it wouldn’t need to be that way if the previous Government had a proper energy policy instead of a bumper sticker.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Why does the Prime Minister think that Rod Carr, former chair of the Climate Change Commission, in his final hearing before this Parliament, said that those who promote the combustion of fossil fuels are “committing crimes against humanity”?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I mean, this is an outrageous conversation we’re actually having here, because this country needs to grow. We need to have economic growth. Are the Greens not for economic growth? I mean, what’s the position? You have to grow an economy. You need to have energy to do it. And we need to make sure we make it affordable, abundant, and we’re not having $1,500 wholesale electricity prices next year—period. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: I think the balance of this question is going to be heard—[Interruption] Sorry, there’s quite a bit of noise in the galleries. Could we just keep the conversations down up in the galleries. We’ll hear the rest of this question in total silence, apart from the person asking the question and the person answering.

Hon David Seymour: Can the Minister confirm that parliamentary activities, including the member for Auckland Central commuting to work by aeroplane every week, contributes to climate change?

SPEAKER: No, he has no responsibility for the travel plans of any other members of Parliament.

Question No. 12—Conservation

12. to the Minister of Conservation: What recent announcements has he made about conservation?

E te Māngai o te Whare. [Member’s glass knocked over]

SPEAKER: I’ll tell you what, that wouldn’t have happened if the member wasn’t so intent on having a conversation across the House.

Hon TAMA POTAKA: Inanahi—yesterday—I announced a $30 million investment from the International Visitor Conservation and Tourism Levy to fund more than a dozen projects to boost biodiversity—kanorautanga—and manuhiri infrastructure in tourism. Tourism is a key critical economic driver, and nature, alongside culture, are our biggest drawcards for international tourists. Around 50 percent of tourists—manuhiri—cite it as their primary reason for coming here, and about 50 percent of international tourists visit our iconic national parks.

Katie Nimon: What are the benefits for biodiversity?

Hon TAMA POTAKA: We are investing $19 million into protecting biodiversity by reducing the spread of pests, predators, and weeds. This includes stopping the spread of wallabies in renowned and spectacular places like the Te Arawa Lakes district; managing deer and goat populations, especially nanny goats, in national parks and visitor areas like the Kaimanawa Range to allow nature to thrive; targeted predator control to protect native species, especially the critically endangered tuturuatu, or southern dotterel birds, in Rakiura National Park; and stopping and removing wilding pines from our majestic landscapes like the Mackenzie Country.

Katie Nimon: What are the benefits for tourism?

Hon TAMA POTAKA: Tourism is a critical part of this Government’s focus on economic growth and supports nearly 200,000 jobs—and, might I say, 15,000 jobs in Māori tourism businesses. Improving tourism infrastructure is good for the economy, helping export receipts and mahi. To manage pressures at our most popular visitor sites, the Government is investing $11 million, including upgrades to huts in Aoraki / Mount Cook; Rangitoto Island, Ngā Pona-toru-a-Peretū; and Motutapu Island, Te Motutapu a Taikehu; safety upgrades to various cable structures including suspension and swing bridges—we’ll build those and get through them—and investment at Goat Island, Te Hāwere-a-Maki, to improve beach access, car-parking, and reflect the area’s significant cultural heritage. “Mook” Hohneck will be pleased. These investments will help a top-notch manuhiri experience at some of our most popular visitor sites.

Katie Nimon: What are the benefits for international visitors?

Hon TAMA POTAKA: Our manuhiri infrastructure is not keeping pace with growing tourist numbers or providing the experiences expected at world-renowned sites like Aoraki and Tongariro. Investments in improving visitor or manuhiri experiences benefit international tourists and all New Zealanders now and into the future for their health and safety, their recreation, and their wairua. Kia ora tātou.

Hon Shane Jones: Can the Minister confirm that the conservation estate has a great role to play in our pro-growth agenda, including the accelerated pace at which concessions are going to be made available to private investors on the Department of Conservation estate, not blighted by troublemakers?

Hon TAMA POTAKA: I look forward to engaging with nearly 30 percent of the entire whenua of Aotearoa to generate more revenue, and to do that in an appropriate manner with reference to iwi and hapū relationships, speeding up concessions and ensuring expedited, appropriate statutory planning.