Parliament: Questions and Answers - Feb 14
ORAL QUESTIONS
QUESTIONS TO
MINISTERS
Question No.
1—Prime Minister
1. Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH
(Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime
Minister: Does she stand by all of her Government's
policies?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN (Prime
Minister):Yes.
Rt Hon Bill
English: In light of her statement that, "we want
to say hand on heart we want to be a society judged on how
we look after our vulnerable", is she aware that many of the
children in partnership schools are vulnerable, so why is
she moving to close those schools?
Rt Hon JACINDA
ARDERN: As I said yesterday, we are working as
closely as we can with those schools to transition them, to
make sure that those children have the best quality
education, and that includes making sure they have
registered teachers and they're being taught the
curriculum.
Rt Hon Bill English: When
the Prime Minister uses the word "transition", is she aware
that the legislation her Government introduces certainly
closes the partnership schools—it makes their closure
absolutely certain because legislation will be passed to
achieve it—but there is no guarantee those schools will be
able to reopen?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN:
It ends the model. It stops future contracts. But it still
allows this Government to negotiate with those schools to
try and keep them open if they are willing to have
registered teachers and to teach the
curriculum.
Rt Hon Bill English: What
guarantee can she give to the students and parents of the
partnership schools, which she is legislating to close, that
they will be allowed to reopen with some other
status?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: As we've
said, we're stopping any opening in the future. With those
who are currently operating, we've said we want to work
constructively with them. There is the ability for them to
operate as special character schools or even, perhaps, as
alternative education operators and providers, and that's
the work that the Ministry of Education is undertaking with
them, as we speak. What I would like to give them is the
assurance that we are working diligently on this. I know
that some of the rhetoric coming from the Opposition isn't
helping with their security, but that's what we're
doing.
Rt Hon Bill English: Can I ask
the question again. What guarantee can the Prime Minister
give that a partnership school will be able to reopen, a
guarantee that is necessary for the peace of mind of the
students, and the parents, who attend those schools and may
not be familiar with the legal niceties she's referring
to?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: As we've
said, I can assure those parents, if the school in which
their child is attending is willing to have registered
teachers to teach to the curriculum and to operate with the
same kind of funding parameters, generally speaking, as
State schools, then that is exactly what we are seeking from
those schools. Ultimately, those parents will want to
probably have those same assurances from those current
providers because a lot of this decision sits in their hands
too.
Rt Hon Bill English: Is it now the
case that if the schools close, it's the schools' fault not
the Government's and that she won't actually offer a
guarantee that schools will be able to reopen and,
therefore, parents and students should be told the truth now
rather than be misled through months of complex legal
negotiations?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: If
these schools have at their heart the best education for
their kids, then I imagine they should be able to
transition.
Hon Chris Hipkins: Is the
Prime Minister aware that existing partnership schools are
being urged to close rather than negotiate with the Ministry
of Education in good faith, and that that urging is coming
from Opposition members of Parliament?
Mr
SPEAKER: No, no. I'm going to disallow that
supplementary. I think the Leader of the House has a special
standard, and he's going to stick with it.
Rt Hon
Bill English: Will the Prime Minister take the
opportunity to visit Pacific Advance Senior School, as I did
on Monday, talk to the staff and the students, hear the
stories of the way that school has changed the lives of
those 13-, 14-year-old girls, and 16-, 17-year-old boys, of
whom, as the Government says, there's only 1,000, so it
won't matter much—
Mr SPEAKER:
Order!
Rt Hon Bill English: Will she
visit a school, look them in the eye, hear the stories, and
reassure them that the Government guarantees the
continuation of that school?
Mr SPEAKER:
Order! Order! I am going to let the Prime Minister answer
it, but I am also going to remind the father of the House
that in the last couple of weeks I'd like him to set a very
good example, which involves succinct questions, and just to
warn people, especially sitting very close to him, if they
ask one that long, it will be ruled out.
Rt Hon
JACINDA ARDERN: That assumes that I haven't met and
spoken to students from charter schools and those who teach
there before—I have. In fact, just a few weeks ago, I had
a conversation with someone who works in a charter school
where they said they were absolutely confident that because
they have registered teachers and teach the curriculum, they
could transition and will.
Rt Hon Bill
English: Is the Prime Minister aware that as part
of this shambles, education officials told a select
committee this morning that the closures could cost up to
$15 million?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN:
Again, the constant framing from the Opposition around
closures when this Government is working—
Hon
Dr Nick Smith: It's your law. It's your
bill.
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Let me
explain to Mr Smith, if he listens closely: we will not
enter into any future contracts. We will negotiate with
existing schools to try and transition them. It is that side
of the House that is scaremongering and trying to cost the
taxpayer money.
Rt Hon Bill English: So
is the Prime Minister unaware, first, that her legislation
guarantees the closure—legislates the closure—of the
schools and, secondly, that the Government will have
contractual obligations of up to a million dollars per
school if the schools are closed as partnership schools,
regardless of the nature of a transition?
Rt Hon
JACINDA ARDERN: I know that the member understands
this. We're ending the model. That doesn't stop the ability
of a school to start operating as a school of special
character.
Hon Nikki Kaye: I raise a
point of order, Mr Speaker.
David
Seymour: I raise a point of order, Mr
Speaker.
Mr SPEAKER: A point—was Nikki
Kaye's a point of order or a question?
Hon Nikki
Kaye: A point of order. The Prime Minister did not
answer the question by the Leader of the Opposition. There
were twofold points there, and she should answer the
question.
Mr SPEAKER: I think she
addressed the question, which is the
requirement.
David Seymour: I seek your
guidance: at what point—
Mr SPEAKER:
No. The member will sit down. It's not the Speaker's role to
do tutorials here; I'm willing to give the member one in my
office later.
David Seymour: I raise a
point of order, Mr Speaker. I'm not seeking your guidance. I
want to know: at what point is the Prime Minister misleading
the House when she introduces legislation—
Mr
SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume his seat,
and he's lost his supplementaries for this week. He knows
well that to accuse a member of misleading the House in the
House in that manner is disorderly. If he's got any
supplementaries left for this week, he doesn't
anymore.
• Question No.
2—Finance
2. TAMATI COFFEY
(Labour—Waiariki) to the Minister of
Finance: What recent reports has he seen on the
health of the New Zealand economy?
Hon GRANT
ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): International
credit ratings agency Moody's published their latest credit
rating opinion for the New Zealand Government this week. It
assessed New Zealand's economic strength as very high and
maintained the Government's Aaa credit rating. Moody's
expects New Zealand's economy to remain among the
fastest-growing Aaa-rated economies in coming years. It also
says that in the longer term, New Zealand's potential GDP
growth is higher than that of many Aaa-rated
countries.
Tamati Coffey: What
contributing factors to the Aaa credit rating did Moody's
identify in its assessment?
Hon GRANT
ROBERTSON: Moody's pointed to this Government's
commitment to preserving fiscal surpluses and reducing
Government debt as a percentage of GDP over the next five
years. They also noted the Government's priorities of
strengthening the economy and employment and the focus on
improving living standards. I'm pleased to see that another
international ratings agency recognises this Government's
progressive economic plan and our fiscal
responsibility.
Tamati Coffey: What
other reports has he seen on the health of the
economy?
Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: While
headline growth indicators for the economy are positive,
another report released this morning, the Salvation Army's
2018 State of the Nation Report, is a salutary
reminder that success in the economy must translate to the
lives of all New Zealanders. The report states: "it is clear
that the benefits of this recent strong economic growth have
not been shared across the board, or trickled down, as the
theory would have it." The Government is committed to
generating inclusive economic growth and taking a more
active approach through initiatives like the Families
Package to ensure that all New Zealanders share in
prosperity.
Hon James Shaw: Did the
Minister see in any of these reports any mention of an $11.6
billion hole in the Government accounts?
Hon
GRANT ROBERTSON: I didn't—
Mr
SPEAKER: No. Order! Order!
• Question No.
3—Finance
3. Hon STEVEN JOYCE
(National) to the Minister of
Finance: Does he agree with the analysis from
Infometrics showing economic growth will slow to 2.6 percent
in 2019, and that the reason for this includes "labour
capacity constraints in the residential construction sector"
and "changes in central government's infrastructure
priorities"?
Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of
Finance): No.
Hon Steven Joyce:
Does he agree with the Reserve Bank's forecast in last
week's Monetary Policy Statement, and I quote, "Residential
investment is assumed to increase—
Mr
SPEAKER: No. [Interruption] Order! Order!
The member will resume his seat. It's very important that
the member realises that supplementaries must flow from an
answer. The member asked about a very specific report and he
got a very specific answer, and the start of his question is
not close to either the primary question or does not flow
from the answer. So the member has lost one
supplementary.
Hon Steven Joyce: Thank
you, Mr Speaker.
Mr SPEAKER: I mean,
he's used it.
Hon Steven Joyce: Given
that answer, does he have any concern along the lines
expressed by Infometrics that the infrastructure sector is
slowing down, as indicated by a number of concerns about
different organisations in the construction
industry?
Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I have
heard some concerns from those in the construction industry,
but I can reassure them and the member that this Government
is ambitious to make sure that we invest in infrastructure
through programmes like KiwiBuild, through investing in
regional roads and rail, and in making sure we make up for
the underinvestment of the previous
Government.
Hon Steven Joyce: Thank you,
Mr Speaker. Given his reference to KiwiBuild, is he aware
that last week's Monetary Policy Statement by the Reserve
Bank indicated that they didn't expect to see any benefit
out of KiwiBuild policies until late 2019, and even then
that would possibly displace private sector investment, and
that the Reserve Bank expects residential investment to
increase more slowly, over the next couple of years, than in
previous years?
Hon GRANT ROBERTSON:
This material was covered in the House yesterday in a
question to Mr Twyford. The Government is confident that we
will see the impact of KiwiBuild, starting in this term:
$5.4 billion of additional investment in the residential
building sector over and above the normal investment by the
private sector. We are taking an active role in making sure
that we have a decent, affordable housing stock, unlike the
previous Government.
Hon Steven Joyce:
Has the Minister had any meetings or been part of any
meeting with representatives of the construction industry or
the contracting industry where they've raised concerns about
the effects of Government building and infrastructure
policies on the industry that may lead to difficulties and a
reduction in staff?
Hon GRANT ROBERTSON:
As I informed the member in the select committee this
morning, in fact, in a public forum issues were raised by
members of the infrastructure community, seeking an
assurance that this Government was committed to investing in
infrastructure. I made that commitment because I believe in
the policies that we have to ensure we do invest in housing,
we do invest in roads, we do invest in rail. That's what a
good Government does. It's just a pity the previous
Government didn't do it.
Hon Steven
Joyce: Does he appreciate the concerns of the
construction industry are, right now, that they had a
long-term pipeline of work that is now being stopped by this
incoming Government, they have no idea what will happen
next, and they are very concerned for the future of their
workforces over the next couple of years?
Hon
GRANT ROBERTSON: I reject the premise in the
member's question. We have a pipeline of work coming
through. It seems that the former Minister seems to believe
that one specific project that was going to cost $327
million per kilometre, the most expensive road in the world,
somehow was the be-all and end-all of infrastructure and
investment. We have a much wider ambition than
that.
Hon Steven Joyce: Does the
Minister perhaps appreciate that it's not me but it's the
construction sector, it's Infometrics, and it's the Reserve
Bank that are raising these flags, and will he take any
steps, beyond just talking, as Minister of Finance to do
anything about the looming slow-down in the construction and
infrastructure sector?
Hon GRANT
ROBERTSON: We have, as I've said before, an
ambitious programme of investment in infrastructure that the
construction sector will be a part of. The member needs to
stop talking down the New Zealand economy and realise that
there are great and ambitious plans on this side of the
House.
• Question No. 10 to Minister, 13
February
Mr SPEAKER: Before we come
to question No. 4 from the Hon Gerry Brownlee, I said
yesterday that I would look at the content of a particular
supplementary question to question No. 10. Upon reflection,
having looked at it, I should have ruled out a question from
the Deputy Prime Minister, and I apologise for not acting on
it at the time.
Hon Gerry Brownlee: What
about giving us one of our supps back?
Mr
SPEAKER: Or taking one away for commenting on the
ruling.
• Question No. 4—Foreign
Affairs
4. Hon GERRY BROWNLEE
(National—Ilam) to the Minister of
Foreign Affairs: Does he stand by all of his
statements?
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Minister of
Foreign Affairs): Yes.
Hon Gerry
Brownlee: When he said in the House yesterday
"that's why we're getting our funding up to do our role.",
was he confirming a very large increase in the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) funding in the 2018
Budget?
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: From 2008
to beyond 2016, there was no increase in MFAT's funding at
all and a huge decline in overseas aid. Luckily, help's been
on its way and we're going to turn that
around.
Hon Gerry Brownlee: When he said
to the House yesterday that one of his priorities is
"improving the character and quality of … foreign policy
engagement", was that an indication that he's dissatisfied
with our current high commissioners and
ambassadors?
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS:
Quite the contrary. This is a superb group of civil
servants—perhaps without any peer in the world, given the
lack of funding they've been suffering under, to the extent
that a hundred senior diplomats left the job, and all of
them from every mission around the world signed a complaint
against the previous Government. We hear them and we're
going to fix things up.
Hon Gerry
Brownlee: Does he stand by all his stated concerns
over foreign ownership of New Zealand assets; and, if so,
has his department told him that under the Comprehensive and
Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership the threshold for
Official Information Act approval for a New Zealand asset
purchase will rise by 100 percent from $100 million to $200
million?
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The
reality is that the present Government is working on a
number of issues about which the question is focused, but
here's the real point: when you are talking to international
countries, the art of diplomacy is to jump into troubled
waters without making a splash; not belly flops like some
members prefer.
Hon David Parker: Is the
Deputy Prime Minister aware that the investment limit from
Australia is already $500 million, that the $200 million
under the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is 40 percent of
that amount, and that Australia already represents 80
percent of New Zealand's foreign direct investment from TPP
countries?
Mr SPEAKER: Answering as the
Minister of Foreign Affairs—
Rt Hon WINSTON
PETERS: Answering as the Minister of Foreign
Affairs, I can confirm that, but it should not be our job to
educate the Opposition.
Hon Gerry
Brownlee: Has his department advised him that in
bilateral meetings with other countries he can say that the
ability for foreign investors to purchase assets including
land will remain open, even with the passing of the
Government's Overseas Investment Amendment Bill, as
indicated to the select committee this morning by
Treasury?
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The
reality is that there is ongoing work until the signing of
certain documents in March, and I've got every confidence in
my colleague the Hon Mr Parker, who understands exactly what
the coalition Government's policy is about. We're not going
to leave ourselves open to the vagaries of international
unbridled capitalism; we're going to take control of our own
destiny.
Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a
point of order, Mr Speaker. In my last two questions, I've
been very careful to align those questions with the
Minister's responsibilities and his engagement with his
ministry. Now he can, you know, flannel his way through all
these things with a series of insults against the previous
Government and, indeed, personal insults as well, but it
doesn't take away his responsibility to answer as a Minister
for his department. Now I asked a question, "Has his
department told him …", and he told me that, no, he trusts
Mr Parker. Well, is the wool over the eyes or not?
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: To the very
contrary, I said I did trust Mr Parker, not that I didn't
trust him. And the second thing is—
Hon Gerry
Brownlee: That's what we said.
Rt Hon
WINSTON PETERS: I wasn't at the select committee
this morning, about which there will be a report back. But
the big picture is that we're working on a number of issues
that were seriously neglected in terms of sovereignty by the
previous Government.
Mr SPEAKER: Right.
I won't count that as a question, but I think the member
more or less asked a question in his point of order, and
certainly got a reply to it.
Hon Gerry
Brownlee: No. With all due
respects—
Mr SPEAKER: Now—is the
member asking me to rule on his point of order now?
Hon Gerry Brownlee: No, I'm
asking—I'm taking a point of order.
Mr
SPEAKER: A new one?
Hon Gerry
Brownlee: Well, it'll have to be, because you've
more or less just ruled on the other one, just like you said
I'd more or less asked a question. The fact is, I didn't ask
a question, "more or less"; I pointed out the Minister was
not answering the question, which was "Has his department
advised him …".
Mr SPEAKER: Yes, and
he addressed the question.
Hon Gerry
Brownlee: Can the Minister tell us what will be the
most visible manifestation of his ambition for an
enlightened improvement in his relationship with Australia?
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: We have for some
time—as is evidenced by the complaints that New Zealanders
have of the way the changed law has been applying in
Australia, even as far back as 2002—
Hon Gerry
Brownlee: There's no change.
Rt Hon
WINSTON PETERS: Could I finish—
Hon
Gerry Brownlee: No change in their law.
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Well, if you
don't want to hear the answer, why, oh why, did you ask the
question? Look, could I just say, Mr Brownlee, this is a
very serious issue. The reality is there's never been a time
since 1946 when Australia has needed New Zealand more, and
vice versa, given the problems and concerns we have in the
Pacific. Now, we believe that we can have a far
better-understanding relationship with the Australian
political system and that the natural justice rules that we
apply in our country will better apply to certain people
there who are suffering from the application of—not the
application of them, but of rigid immigration rules, for
example.
• Question No.
5—Statistics
5. JAN LOGIE (Green)
to the Minister of Statistics: What steps
are being taken by Statistics New Zealand to ensure better
collection of information about the rainbow
community?
Hon JAMES SHAW (Minister of
Statistics): I've written to the Government
Statistician to make clear that work on collecting
information on sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation
is a priority for me as Minister of Statistics and have
requested that Statistics New Zealand's work programme in
this area be progressed at pace. I note that, while it is a
priority and work will be progressed, future decisions on
how these topics are collected is the sole responsibility of
the Government Statistician. But I do hope that the 2018
Census will be the last that fails to give New Zealanders
the chance to identify themselves based on gender or sexual
identity.
Jan Logie: Why were these
options not included in this year's census?
Hon
JAMES SHAW: Despite rigorous testing, Statistics
New Zealand have not yet been able to develop a
statistically robust way to collect information on gender
and sexual identity, as well as sexual orientation, in a
self-completed questionnaire format such as the census. It's
possible that interview-based surveys like the General
Social Survey may prove to be a far more robust way to
gather this information. That's why Statistics New Zealand
have included a question on sexual orientation in the 2018
General Social Survey. That will enable Statistics New
Zealand to test the methods and questions employed in
collecting this information and will help to develop a
statistically robust set of questions for the census in
2023, as well as all other social surveys in the
future.
Jan Logie: What options are
there in this year's census for the intersex people who
cannot accurately assign themselves biologically to male or
female?
Hon JAMES SHAW: As an interim
option, in this year's census, people who want to indicate
their biological sex is neither male nor female will be able
to request a paper form and mark both male and female. More
information is available on the Statistics
website.
Jan Logie: Why is this work an
area of priority for the Minister?
Hon JAMES
SHAW: This is about helping to bring down the walls
of discrimination, bullying, and stigma. People in the
rainbow community have been feeling marginalised by the
absence of this kind of data gathering, and we need it so
that everyone can feel represented in New Zealand's data.
But, also, we need this information for the Government to
make informed public policy and funding decisions based on
good data. We need good data in order to be able to serve
the rainbow community and population
effectively.
• Question No. 6—Education (Māori
Education)
6. Hon NIKKI KAYE
(National—Auckland Central) to the
Associate Minister of Education: Has he
received any reports indicating challenges in Māori
education achievement?
Hon KELVIN DAVIS
(Associate Minister of Education): Yes, I have.
Most importantly, I've heard from Māori parents and
teachers who are ecstatic that this Government has removed
national standards—a barrier to Māori educational
achievement the National Government put in
place.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! Just before
the member asks her question, I do want to make it very
clear that in answering "Yes" to that question, the Minister
is saying that he has received official reports in that
area. If that's not the case, he should make it clear
now.
Hon KELVIN DAVIS: No, Mr Speaker,
not official reports, but certainly reports from
parents.
Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a
point of order, Mr Speaker. It was a very interesting point
that you laid out for the House, and probably very
instructional for the Government, but is that an appropriate
role for the Speaker—to ask for someone to correct an
answer in the House? That's not what we understand the
normal procedure to be.
Mr SPEAKER: Yes,
and the problem that I had, Mr Brownlee, was that the answer
was, effectively, out of order because it said "Yes" at the
beginning and then indicated that the report that had been
received was not an official report. I just wanted to
clarify with the member in order to assist members with
their supplementaries. It is something that I have done at
least twice previously, once with a Government supplementary
involving Mr Robertson and once with an Opposition
supplementary previously. I know that there's not a high
level of understanding within members of the House as to
what receiving means as opposed to seeing, and the
difference it means for ministerial
responsibility.
Hon Nikki Kaye: Has he
received communications or had discussions with partnership
schools about the impact and challenges to young Māori of
getting rid of the partnership schools model?
Hon
KELVIN DAVIS: I've had communications with some
current charter schools. They're mainly concerned about the
scaremongering that's been propagated by members of the
Opposition, in particular members such as herself, who are
doing their best Chicken Little impersonation, telling them
the sky is going to fall down on their heads. However, I am
comforted by the old Ngāpuhi saying that says, loosely
translated, "A chicken is just a grown-up
egg."
Hon Nikki Kaye: When the Prime
Minister said he had discussions with several partnership
schools, can he confirm he was not acting in his capacity as
Associate Minister of Education?
Hon KELVIN
DAVIS: The charter schools in the north contacted
me as their local member of Parliament because they were
scared about the scaremongering that's been propagated by
the Opposition MPs around charter schools.
Hon
Nikki Kaye: Will he cooperate fully with the formal
complaint that has been lodged against him by a partnership
school that he is giving preferential treatment by
responding only0020to partnership schools that he has links
with?
Hon KELVIN DAVIS: This is a great
opportunity for me to explain. I am aware of that complaint
she's mentioned. Let me say that on 12 February, I actually
tried to ring one of the members of another charter school
in west Auckland. They didn't pick up the phone. But,
again—[Interruption]
Mr
SPEAKER: Order! I do get the idea that members on
my left would like this series of questions to continue. If
they do, they're going to listen to the
answers.
Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Thank you, Mr
Speaker. I just want to say to the member, though, that
there's been no favouritism. I was approached by He Puna
Mārama Trust because of the scaremongering and the false
information being propagated. So I responded to them and
talked them through the publicly available information that
the Minister—the fantastic, the best education Minister in
10 years—proactively released just last
week.
Hon Nikki Kaye: In light of the
Radio New Zealand story a number of minutes ago that says,
"Labour Māori MPs, including Kelvin Davis, have given their
word that Māori charter schools will not shut
down."—
Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise
a point of order, Mr Speaker. I don't think it does this
Parliament any service to see a member reading the question
out from a telephone, which is something I've never seen
before. It lowers the dignity of this
Parliament—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I'm
going to ask the right honourable Deputy Prime Minister to
repeat his point of order, and I will not have any
interjection during points of order.
Rt Hon
Winston Peters: My point of order is about the
dignity of this House. It is not enhanced when someone is
reading their question out from their cellphone, which is
what I saw. If you want to look at the parliamentary record,
it'll show that as well. That's what I'm raising as a matter
of public order.
Hon Gerry Brownlee: Mr
Speaker—
Mr SPEAKER: No, I don't need
the member's assistance. I think members these days get
their information in the House in a variety of manners, and
Radio New Zealand is available on the cellphones. If the
member is quoting from that, it is something that I have
seen done previously. If the member was being supplied by a
person outside with particular questions to be asked, that
would be a different matter. But I think it's an
unreasonable assumption to make.
Hon Nikki
Kaye: In light of the Radio New Zealand story a
number of minutes ago that says that "Labour Māori MPs,
including Kelvin Davis, have given their word that Māori
charter schools will not shut down.", will he fully
cooperate with the inquiry, where people are saying he's
given preferential treatment in a complex legal
process?
Mr SPEAKER: In so far as he has
ministerial responsibility, which I haven't yet
seen.
Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Mr Speaker, I'll
cooperate with whatever the complaint process is. But let me
say that I'm happy to get in touch with other charter
schools. I'm happy to speak to them if they too are confused
by the scaremongering and misinformation of the Opposition
parties.
• Question No. 7—Social
Development
7. JO LUXTON (Labour) to
the Minister for Social Development: Will
the Families Package address the challenges faced by many
families of growing living costs and food poverty, as
highlighted in the Salvation Army's State of the Nation
Report, released today?
Hon CARMEL SEPULONI
(Minister for Social Development): Yes, the
Government's Families Package is designed to directly
address the challenges faced by low-income New Zealanders.
It increases the incomes of thousands of Kiwi families
facing rising living costs and food instability, in
particular by increasing the accommodation supplement and
changes to Working for Families. Together, these initiatives
will support families struggling to get by.
Jo
Luxton: What specific measures will the Families
Package deliver to ensure families can meet rising living
costs?
Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Rising house
prices and rents are a major driver of hardship, as
highlighted in the State of the Nation Report. Our
Families Package will provide targeted assistance to help
address this. It includes increases to the accommodation
supplement and accommodation benefit, which mean that
135,000 families will gain an average of $35 per week. This
increase sits alongside this Government's other commitments
to building more affordable homes, expanding the social
housing stock, and making New Zealand homes warmer and
drier.
Jo Luxton: What other living
costs will the Families Package help New Zealanders to
meet?
Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Winter can be
really hard on the health of our elderly and children. As
part of our Families Package, our winter energy payment will
help superannuitants and beneficiaries to afford the heating
they need to keep themselves warm and healthy. When fully
implemented, a single person receiving superannuation or who
is on a benefit with no dependent children will receive
$450, and couples and singles with children will receive an
additional $700 over a five-month period.
• Question
No. 9—Agriculture
9. Hon NATHAN GUY
(National—Ōtaki) to the Minister of
Agriculture: Does he stand by all of his
statements?
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR (Minister of
Agriculture): Yes, in the context in which they
were made.
Hon Nathan Guy: How does he
reconcile his statement in relation to M. bovis from
July last year, and I quote, "All the cows and any with
possible contact with another cow should all be destroyed."
with how he's now stopped any culling of the
herds?
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: At the time
of first discovery, there was one farm and one farming
operation involved. Culling did begin, but, unfortunately,
we then discovered that there was a second infected property
in Southland. That led us to believe that there were
possibly hundreds of properties that could have been
infected, and the issue of whether it's possible to
eradicate or whether we were faced with an ongoing
management regime for Mycoplasma bovis is the dilemma
that we still face. Officials have, for a number of reasons,
stopped culling at this point.
Hon Nathan
Guy: What financial advice has the Minister
received to manage or eradicate M. bovis from his
officials, and how much?
Hon DAMIEN
O'CONNOR: Officials, thankfully, are not affected
by the disease, but there are an increasing number of
affected animals throughout this country, for a whole lot of
reasons. Obviously, inadequate biosecurity import health
standards, initially, which have allowed this disease into
this country, have led us to a very sad and challenging
situation where, through money appropriated through the
Ministry of Primary Industries, we have been able to conduct
the process thus far of tracing, of some extermination of
some animals and removing them, and of ongoing testing and
monitoring. To date, the number of confirmed infected
properties is 23, the number of properties under restricted
place notice are 38, the number of trace properties is over
1,500—this is a huge operation, and we cannot at this
point say the total cost of this operation.
Hon
Nathan Guy: Has the Government asked industry to
contribute to the costs of eradication or management of
M. bovis; and, if so, how much money has been
requested from the Government to industry?
Hon
DAMIEN O'CONNOR: There has been no—
Mr
SPEAKER: Order! Did the member want to rephrase it,
because I think there was an inconsistency between the
beginning and the end. It's a question of who was asking
whom for money.
Hon Nathan Guy: Has the
Government requested any contribution from industry to
either contain or eradicate M. bovis; and, if
so, how much money has been requested from the
industry?
Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: No such
request has gone to industry at this point. Both the
director-general and
myself—[Interruption].
Mr
SPEAKER: Order! The Hon Nathan Guy, I think the
member—
Hon Member: Animal
noises.
Mr SPEAKER: Well, that was the
point I was going to make. He used to be the Minister in
charge of animal welfare, and it sounds like an animal is
being tortured at the moment.
Hon DAMIEN
O'CONNOR: I'll attempt to put him at
ease.
Mr SPEAKER: No. I think the
member's answered it.
Hon DAMIEN
O'CONNOR: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I'd
like to answer more fully, to put the member at
ease.
Mr SPEAKER: No. I think, given the
response, that is almost impossible. The member will resume
his seat.
Hon Nathan Guy: He'll be back
to correct that one. Why did the Minister—
Mr
SPEAKER: Order! The member just lost that
supplementary.
• Question No. 10—Workplace
Relations and Safety
10. MARJA LUBECK
(Labour) to the Minister for Workplace
Relations and Safety: What actions has the
Government taken recently to tackle migrant worker
exploitation?
Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Minister
for Workplace Relations and Safety): The Government
is working on a number of fronts to tackle migrant
exploitation. Recently, a couple who owned an Auckland-based
restaurant were sentenced on charges relating to
exploitation of their workers, resulting in 26 months'
imprisonment for one and eight months' home detention for
the other. This is the first custodial sentence for migrant
exploitation in New Zealand, sending a strong message that
migrant exploitation will not be tolerated.
Marja
Lubeck: What are the Government's further plans to
address migrant worker exploitation?
Hon IAIN
LEES-GALLOWAY: I note that of the labour
inspectorate's investigations of the current financial year,
more than half involve migrant workers. That's why we are
committed to increasing the resourcing for, and doubling the
number of, labour inspectors. We will soon initiate an
inquiry into migrant exploitation, and we are working on a
number of fronts to stamp out the shameful exploitation of
international students.
Marja Lubeck:
And why is the Government tackling migrant worker
exploitation?
Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY:
Exploitation is a source of human misery and is simply not
acceptable in New Zealand. We need to be known as a nation
that upholds workers' rights and a great place for migrants
to live and work. The good employers should not be
undermined by rogues who exploit their
workers.
• Question No.
11—Employment
11. Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH
(National) to the Minister of
Employment: Does he stand by all of his
statements?
Hon WILLIE JACKSON (Minister of
Employment): Sometimes you make statements that
make perfect sense at the time. Look at the Leader of the
Opposition, Mr Bill English. In October, he—
Mr
SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume his seat.
The member didn't start well when he involved me in the
answer, and he was going to continue in an out-of-order way.
The member will now stand and answer the
question.
Hon WILLIE JACKSON: At the
time of making them, yes, in context.
Hon Paul
Goldsmith:
Supplementary—[Interruption]
Mr
SPEAKER: So that's one down.
Hon Paul
Goldsmith: Was he serious with his answer to my
question yesterday on why he thinks New Zealand has the
lowest unemployment rate in 10 years: that the current
Government has done a great job in the past few
months?
Hon WILLIE JACKSON: I was
absolutely serious with my answer yesterday. This Government
has done fantastic work in the last few months, and it's
getting better by the day.
Hon Paul
Goldsmith: Does he stand by his admission on Radio
New Zealand National last week that Māori unemployment had
indeed fallen 20 percent in 2017, and, if so, how does he
explain that fall?
Hon WILLIE JACKSON:
Yes, I do stand by my statement on Radio New Zealand
National that, obviously, unemployment has dropped by 20
percent. There's no problem with admitting that. The figures
that the member refers to above relate to a drop in
unemployment when comparing Māori with Māori annually.
What the member appears to be missing is that my emphasis
was that the Māori unemployment rate, when compared to the
general population, has dropped by only 2.9 percent, and
sits at 9 percent—double the rate of unemployment for the
general population.
Hon Paul Goldsmith:
Is the Minister happy with the trend this year in the
unemployment rate in Northland?
Hon WILLIE
JACKSON: We've got some programmes in Northland.
Things are getting better, but there's a lot of work to be
done. We're going to get certain programmes in there
targeting youth, and we're going to get resourcing and
funding out that the previous Government refused to
support.
Hon Paul Goldsmith: I raise a
point of order, Mr Speaker. I asked a simple question—was
he happy with something—and he made no effort at all to
answer that.
Mr SPEAKER: I think he did,
right at the beginning. He addressed it.
Rino
Tirikatene: Why do young people continue to be at
the forefront of the Government's employment
strategy?
Mr SPEAKER: No. I'm happy to
listen to the Minister explain to me how that relates to his
previous answer. If he can relate it to his previous answer,
he can answer it.
Hon WILLIE JACKSON:
Sorry, Mr Speaker, what was the previous answer? Can I just
clarify what the previous answer was—in terms of Māori
youth?
Mr SPEAKER: No. I think we'll
just—[Interruption] Order! I think we're just going
to scrub this one. We're going to scrub this one now,
because I don't think Mr Tirikatene's question related to a
particular statement that the Minister had
made.
Rino Tirikatene: I raise a point
of order, Mr Speaker.
Mr SPEAKER: I'm
willing to hear from the member.
Rino
Tirikatene: My question related to young people, in
particular in the context of young Māori people, which has
been part of the interchange on this
question.
Hon Gerry Brownlee: Speaking
to the point of order, Mr Speaker.
Mr
SPEAKER: Speaking to the point of order—you're
going to support him, are you, Mr Brownlee?
Hon
Gerry Brownlee: No, I'm not, but I would support a
continuation of questions going to the Minister. The primary
question says, "Does he stand by all his statements?" Now,
it would be very easy for the vast machinery of the
Government to have come up with a supplementary question
today that would have met the requirements of question time
relating to the primary question. I think you've been very
generous in saying, "Can you relate it to the previous
question?", but it's a bit hard when the previous question
was answered by the Minister with a series of stats that
we're quite sure, on this side of the House, did not relate
to the question. But that's for another day.
Mr
SPEAKER: It was a lovely speech, but I'm not quite
sure how I should rule on it. I think I'm going to rule on
it by going on to question No. 12.
• Question No.
12—Youth
12. CHRIS BISHOP (National—Hutt
South) to the Minister for Youth:
What steps has he taken to ensure maximum opportunities for
the positive engagement and contribution of Māori
youth?
Hon PEENI HENARE (Minister for
Youth): For New Zealand to thrive now and in the
future, all young Kiwis need to have the capacity,
capability, and resilience to be the best they can be. As
Minister for Youth, maximising opportunities for all of New
Zealand's young people, including Māori youth, is a key
priority for me.
Chris Bishop: What
conversations—[Interruption]
Mr
SPEAKER: Both those interjections—each of
them—result in an extra supplementary for the National
Party.
Chris Bishop: What conversations
or discussions has he had with partnership
schools?
Hon Chris Hipkins: I raise a
point of order, Mr Speaker. The Minister for Youth has no
ministerial responsibility for conversations with
partnership schools.
Mr SPEAKER: Yes,
and I'm willing to let the question go forward. It may be
that the Minister for Youth in that portfolio has had a
discussion with a charter school. We know that it wouldn't
be his direct ministerial responsibility, but it might have
happened as part of his portfolio and if it hasn't happened,
it's very easy for him to answer.
Hon PEENI
HENARE: None.
Chris Bishop: Has
he visited a partnership school?
Mr
SPEAKER: No, I think that that one can now—given
the fact that the Minister has clearly said he's had no
discussions, I don't think he would visit one and not talk
to anyone, and, therefore, that—
Hon Gerry
Brownlee: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.
There could well be quite a difference, despite your
immediate reaction to that, and I think that the problem
here is that we've got a Minister for Youth who has a very
broad responsibility for representation of youth and also a
very big responsibility to know what youth issues are. He
stated in his primary answer that his concern is
particularly for the development of Māori youth, and it
wouldn't be unreasonable, then, to ask the question: has he
visited a partnership school? He may not have talked to
staff.
Mr SPEAKER: OK, on the basis that
the Minister might have visited a school and spoken to no
one, the Minister can answer the question.
Hon
PEENI HENARE: Not in my capacity as the Minister
for Youth.
Chris Bishop: Can he confirm
that the Prime Minister gave him a stern talking-to for
allowing her to appear in a photo at the Prime Minister's
own Youth Awards with a student at a partnership
school?
Hon PEENI HENARE: We are very
proud of all of the young people who receive awards at the
Prime Minister's awards. Look, we don't have the background
of every member who received a certificate, and I can tell
this House that it was over 160 young people who walked
across that stage. It is impossible for us to know the
background and the school of each student.
Chris
Bishop: Is he saying, then, further to that answer,
that if the Minister and his office and his department had
known that a student who was going to receive a Prime
Minister's youth award was from a partnership school, they
would not have received the award?
Hon PEENI
HENARE: We were there to celebrate youth, and that
is the kaupapa; as each one walked across that stage, they
received a warm handshake and congratulations.
Mr
SPEAKER: Mr Hipkins?
Hon Chris
Hipkins: Normally, you would say that that brings
to the end questions for oral answer; that's what I was
waiting for.
Mr SPEAKER: Sorry, it
does.