https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA2511/S00068/oral-questions-questions-to-ministers-11-november-2025.htm
|
| ||
Oral Questions — Questions To Ministers — 11 November 2025 |
||
Sitting date: 11 November 2025
ORAL QUESTIONS
QUESTIONS TO MINISTERS
1. Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all of his Government's statements and actions?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister): Yes.
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Who is correct: the Prime Minister when he said, "we've got the right economic plan", or the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Winston Peters, who said his Government is "pursing a failed economic strategy"?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I'm not sure the member said that. I'll just say the Minister of Foreign Affairs has been here a long time—he's been here almost half a century. He has a lot of entrenched positions on lots of different things, but he and I are very, very cognisant of what our pronouns are, and they are "we".
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Does he agree with Winston Peters that his Government has "failed to run the economy properly", and, if not, how is shrinking the economy by 1.2 percent proper economic management?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, as we have discussed before in this House, this Government inherited the biggest recession in 35 years. It also inherited the longest post - COVID-19 hangover, which I note that members on the opposite side failed to take responsibility to discuss or to show up for any hearings on, and, as a result, it's been difficult cleaning up that mess. But the good news is that parts of our economy are recovering well; other parts are continuing to struggle, but there are positive signs that future growth is on the way. Just look at the 3.5 percent growth in jobs ads, look at the 4 percent growth in exports, and look at the job-rich infrastructure activities that are coming our way.
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Well, does he agree with Winston Peters that the Government is "not actually fixing the economy", and, if not, how does he explain why more people are out of work and staying out of work for longer than at any time in the last 30 years?
Hon Shane Jones: Context—context.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I can—
SPEAKER: Just a moment. Please repeat the question, without any interruptions from anywhere in the House.
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Well, does he agree with Winston Peters that the Government is "not actually fixing the economy"; and, if not, how does he explain that more people are out of work and staying out of work for longer than at any time in the last 30 years?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, because there was a Labour Government that increased Government spending by 84 percent and that drove up domestic inflation, which drove up interest rates 12 times to record highs. That ends up putting an economy into recession, and that means people lose their jobs. The good news is that unemployment is about peaking; it's less than what the forecast was under his Government.
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Was Winston Peters correct when he said of the current Government this morning that "we haven't turned the economy around in the way we should have as fast as we should have"; if not, why was he wrong?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, as I've said, parts of our economy are recovering well and are experiencing growth. As I've said before, it's a two-speed recovery at this point in time; there are parts that are also struggling. But the good news is just look at the commentators' reports and look at the forecasts going forward from here, and you can see that people are feeling positive that the economy is now growing. It's expected to strengthen its growth, and that's a good thing that we should be celebrating, because cleaning up a mess, after six years of mismanagement in less than two years, is pretty good.
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Will he guarantee there'll be no sale or reduction of the Government's current 100 percent ownership of Kiwibank before the election; if not, why not?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I've been very clear: we won't have asset sales under this term. But, as I said yesterday, we should be able to have a more serious conversation, rather than a political one, about what is the optimal use of capital. With very high-functioning economies like Singapore, one of the hallmarks of their success is asset recycling, and we should look to do the same.
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: In that case, is the Government preceding with Kiwibank's current capital raise, which Kiwibank has announced will be concluded by June next year; if so, how can he say that the Government's ownership of Kiwibank won't be diluted before the next election?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: There is ongoing engagement with the market and there is ongoing advice being taken.
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. The Prime Minister said in his answer to the previous question that there will be no asset sales before the election. Kiwibank are currently in the process of trying to raise capital, and that is going to be concluded—according to Kiwibank's announcement and the announcement of the Minister of Finance—by June next year. I'd ask the Prime Minister how he can reconcile those two statements.
SPEAKER: Well, you're asking me to judge the quality of the answer. I sit here, listening to the question, and immediately, in my head, thinking that there are many ways which capital can be raised. If the Prime Minister has got more to add, he may do so.
Hon David Seymour: Point of order, Mr Speaker. It was clear to everyone that the Prime Minister had addressed the question, as the Standing Orders require. The Leader of the Opposition is using points of order to make political points, and I think that's unacceptable.
SPEAKER: Yes, well, I think the leader of the ACT Party is doing exactly the same thing at the moment. I was in the middle of explaining a position when you decided you'd add your little bit to it—very unhelpful. Does the Prime Minister have more to say?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I would just say that that's not characterised as an asset sale. The member seems to misunderstand what equity and debt and asset sales actually are. We saw a similar response to the Chorus proposal. He sold Kiwi wealth out of Kiwibank. That was an asset sale; this is not that. [Interruption]
SPEAKER: Someone from the Government backbench is going to be leaving the House very shortly if we have more of those outbursts.
Hon Nicola Willis: Can the Prime Minister confirm that under the last Government, Kiwibank sold its KiwiSaver business for $310 million to Fisher Funds, whereas under this Government, we are focused on getting more investment into Kiwibank through a capital raise?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Yes, and that is what is the difference between an asset sale and a capital raise. They're two different things.
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Was that sale of Kiwi Wealth Ltd conducted before or after the previous Labour Government bought back the 49 percent of Kiwibank that the previous National Government sold?
SPEAKER: Well, I think you've made a point, but it's not something he's got responsibility for.
Rt Hon Winston Peters: Supplementary question.
SPEAKER: The Rt Hon Winston—
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker.
SPEAKER: No, hang on. You asked: can he confirm something that a previous Government had done—
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Which was exactly the question the Minister of Finance asked him immediately prior to that. So if he's responsible for question that she asked him, which was to do with the actions of a previous Government, how is he not responsible for my question?
SPEAKER: Well, I don't know if you want the Prime Minister to be responsible for the actions of a previous Government—and that would be something new. But the Prime Minister may like to make a comment on that.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Look, I'm not responsible for the actions of a previous Government, but what I would say is that the member has got himself a bit worked up into a lather and has gone down a bit of a wormhole, and the reality is that this is a Government that is committed to not having asset sales over the course of this term. But there is a legitimately serious conversation that we should be having in this country so that we can ensure that Government capital is deployed to the highest possible purpose, with the best returns and the greatest benefits to its citizens.
Rt Hon Winston Peters: With respect to the substance of Nicola Willis's question, does the Prime Minister know the massive dissociated scandal that went with that transaction?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I'm unaware of the details, and, again, I'm not responsible for the actions of the previous Government.
Hon David Seymour: Does the Prime Minister believe that the public of New Zealand recognise the challenges their country faces and are up for an honest, rather than an emotional, conversation around how the Government manages its assets?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I think that we should make the case to the New Zealand people pro and for the position on asset sales, and the reason is very simple, which is that if you are a high-functioning economy like Singapore, one of the hallmarks of their success has been their asset recycling. They're able to take Government capital and redeploy it to higher purposes that generate greater returns and greater benefits for their people. It's pretty simple.
Rt Hon Winston Peters: Can the Prime Minister tell us as to who privatised a third of the BNZ without going to tender, so that within three years that bank was—the biggest bank in this country—insolvent?
Hon David Seymour: You're not responsible for a previous Government.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I think that might not be—I'm not responsible for previous Governments' actions, yeah.
Hon Chris Bishop: Can the Prime Minister confirm, with reference to the Leader of the Opposition's remark about the sell-down of Kiwibank in the previous Government, that in 2016, the New Zealand Superannuation Fund acquired a 25 percent share in Kiwibank and the Accident Compensation Corporation acquired another 22 percent share, all of which, of course, are on the Crown balance sheet?
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: And we had to buy it back, because they were trying to sell it off.
Hon Chris Bishop: Buy it back from what—from the super fund? [Interruption]
SPEAKER: Wait on. Sorry—
Hon Chris Bishop: That's your proposal.
SPEAKER: —do you want to leave the House? Do both sides want to leave the House, because that will be happening if that sort of exchange occurs again. The Rt Hon Prime Minister.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I don't have anything further to add, except to say that I think we're going to have an adult conversation—a serious conversation, a strategic one—to say that if there is Government capital or Government assets that could or should be recycled for greater purpose and greater benefit for the New Zealand people, that's a legitimate question that we should have. But we should have it without trying to politicise it in the way the member started today.
2. DEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER (Co-Leader—Te Pāti Māori) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his Government's statements and actions?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister): Yes.
Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: What does he have to the 29 kura and the 95,000 kaiako and ākonga who have spoken out against the education reforms his Government intends to pass tonight?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: That they should be incredibly supportive, because this is a Government that is focused on lifting educational achievement and attendance for Māori and non-Māori students, and the success that we have seen already in the lift of new-entrant Māori reading rates under a structured literacy programme are incredibly encouraging.
Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Does he stand by the answer that the Minister of Education gave last week to our question on removing Te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations from school boards that "Elected parents to a school board should not be delegated what is a core Crown responsibility."?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Yes, I do. I don't believe it's the board's responsibility to discharge a Crown responsibility around Treaty obligations. I believe it is the board's responsibility—their No. 1 priority—to make sure that they get kids to school, that they teach them the basics brilliantly, and that they focus on academic attendance and achievement.
Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Should Crown entities be expected to uphold core Crown responsibilities?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Again, the Crown has its relationships and its obligations under the Treaty of Waitangi, and I've addressed that.
Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Why should school boards—a specified Crown entity—not be delegated a core Crown responsibility?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: We are making it crystal clear to board members that we expect, in a country where half of our kids don't go to school regularly, thanks to a Labour - Greens previous Government policy; in a country where half of our kids are not at the standard that they need to be at for reading, thanks to a Labour - Greens education policy; and where 80 percent of our kids who are hitting high school are not at the standard that they need to be at in mathematics, that we are going to do everything, and that nothing is more important than setting our kids—Māori or non-Māori—up for success so that they can access high-paying jobs. We are not tolerating, after five-and-a-half years of an absolutely hopeless education Minister who ran our education into the ground, couldn't get the kids to school, couldn't teach them to read and write, and couldn't teach them maths—we're not doing that any more.
Rawiri Waititi: What is his Government's track record of upholding their core Crown responsibility to honour Te Tiriti o Waitangi?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: We, as a Government, are very focused on improving outcomes for Māori, and I would appreciate it if that member maybe had some policy contribution to make as a party as to what he's doing to improve educational outcomes for Māori, what he's doing to improve health outcomes for Māori, or improve economic opportunities for Māori. There's been nothing from that member that I've heard on those policies.
Hon Erica Stanford: Can he confirm that the core tenet of upholding the Treaty is around raising achievement for Māori students, and that it has, in fact, been the first time in the last two decades that we've seen an increase in Māori reading achievement through the phonics check?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Yes, I can. Again, what we believe, on this side of the House, is in providing kids—[Interruption]
SPEAKER: Sorry—sorry. Prime Minister, stop for a minute. It's not possible for the House to hear an answer when there is an immediate barrage as soon as he stands on his feet.
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: I can hear him.
SPEAKER: Well, you've clearly got a greater capacity for hearing than I do.
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: I'm happy to swap with someone who can't.
SPEAKER: Prime Minister, you're going to be given a little bit of a better opportunity to answer that question.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: On this side of the House, we believe that Kiwi kids, setting off on life, should have an equality of opportunity, and one of the ways we do that is we lift educational outcomes for all kids, irrespective of their backgrounds, their ethnicities, and their circumstances. I am proud to say that our focus on back to basics has meant that for young, five-year-old Māori kids, doing their first phonics checks 20 weeks into school life, there has actually been an 18 percent improvement, where they're at or above expectations. There has been a 15 percent reduction in Māori new entrant kids needing new and targeted support. That is a good thing, and I would hope that those members of that party, if they genuinely cared about improving outcomes for Māori, would celebrate that.
Hon David Seymour: Does removing Treaty obligations from school boards actually stop anyone from doing anything they would like to do, or does it simply give more people the choice to live as they would like to in this country?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: It makes it crystal clear that the primary, No. 1 job of school boards is to focus on educational achievement—nothing matters more than that.
Rawiri Waititi: If Crown entities are not expected to uphold core Crown responsibilities, and if his Government is not expected to uphold core Crown responsibilities, who is?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: The Crown does honour and uphold its responsibilities under the Treaty—that is our obligation to do that. In this case, when we're talking about school boards, we want school boards focused on getting kids to school and getting them set up for success, and I would hope that those members really would want those same outcomes for their kids, too.
Hon Shane Jones: On the importance of the Treaty of Waitangi as a part of the education curriculum, can he confirm that conflict resolution is a key outcome, and sadly it's lapsing?
SPEAKER: Rawiri Waititi—
Hon Shane Jones: Point of order, Mr Speaker. That question in no way violates 390 of Standing Orders. Conflict resolution is a key part of educational outcomes.
SPEAKER: You're quite right, but the Prime Minister didn't stand up to answer.
Rawiri Waititi: Why has he allowed David Seymour to test his deregulation agenda on our mokopuna with the Education and Training (Early Childhood Education Reform) Amendment Bill?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: With apologies, I don't really fully understand the gist of the question. I'd just say that the Regulatory Standards Bill is about making sure that we make regulation in a better way, that we get better quality legislation and regulation, and that's what's been proposed with that bill.
Rawiri Waititi: Why does his Government feel so threatened by Te Tiriti o Waitangi?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: We're not. We're a Government that's very focused on saying that it's high time we improved educational outcomes for Māori, we improve health outcomes for Māori, we improve economic opportunities for Māori, and that's what this Government is working really hard to do.
Hon Shane Jones: Following up on the question of "threatened", does the Prime Minister feel threatened by any of the Māori members of his Cabinet?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: No, I appreciate the challenge that I get from them on a daily and weekly basis.
3. DAN BIDOIS (National—Northcote) to the Minister for Economic Growth: What actions will the Government take to boost the success of the New Zealand screen industry?
Hon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister for Economic Growth): Last week, I announced changes to the international screen production rebate, ensuring New Zealand remains a competitive and attractive destination for international productions to invest and create jobs for New Zealanders. Analysis shows that, for every dollar invested, the scheme delivers around $2.40 in economic return, supporting more than 24,000 jobs and more than 5,200 businesses. The Government backs New Zealand business to do well and compete on the world stage, and that is why in Budget 2025 we confirmed $577 million in new funding over four years for the scheme. The rebate will only be paid out if new productions come here and make investments in our economy. These changes that I have announced will generate more investment, create more skilled jobs, and ensure New Zealand remains screen test ready.
Dan Bidois: How will the updated rebate settings make New Zealand more competitive internationally?
Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Global competition for large-scale productions and small and medium size productions is fierce. The updated settings ensure that New Zealand has its ticket to the game and lower the qualifying threshold to attract more productions, a change described by the screen production association as a game changer; making the 5 percent uplift more accessible for productions delivering lasting economic benefits; extending eligibility to our world-leading post-digital and visual effects only projects; and removing the cap on above-the-line costs to bring us into line with international standards. These refinements respond directly to industry feedback and will help secure more consistent work for our world-class crews, technicians, and creatives.
Dan Bidois: What has been the reaction from the screen sector to these changes?
Hon NICOLA WILLIS: The response has been overwhelmingly positive. The screen industry guild described it as big news for New Zealand's screen sector. The screen producers New Zealand president said it is incredibly welcome news, a pragmatic decision, and the one that's the real game-changer is taking down the value of projects. The New Zealand Film Commission said the changes will strengthen New Zealand's competitive position, and industry figure Cliff Curtis called the updates crucial to keep New Zealand competitive on the world stage. This Government is listening to industry to secure growth, investment, and opportunity in a very important export sector.
Dan Bidois: How does investment in the screen industry contribute to the Government's wider economic goals?
Hon NICOLA WILLIS: We see the screen industry as part of our plan to develop talent, create higher-paying jobs, and double the value of New Zealand's exports in 10 years. It attracts international capital, builds skills, and promotes New Zealand's brand to global audiences. Modelling indicates the improved rebate settings, which we have delivered, could attract as many as 15 additional international productions per year and increase foreign investment by several hundred million dollars. Productions made here, like Avatar and The Lord of the Rings, generate not just the jobs on set but the flow-on benefits for tourism and hospitality. I am told that one boat produced for the Avatar movie involved contracts with more than 40 small New Zealand businesses. We are backing this kind of activity, this high-return industry, to deliver growth for New Zealanders.
4. Hon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) to the Minister of Finance: Does she stand by her statement of 29 August 2024, "Difficult conditions are starting to ease. We are already seeing the green shoots of recovery"; if so, why?
Hon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance): Yes. Let me take the member back in time. That was the quarter when Consumers Price Index inflation finally came back within the 1 to 3 percent target band, having been above the top of the band for three whole years, reaching a peak of 7.3 percent under the previous Government, driving a cost of living crisis. Two weeks before the statement the member quotes, the Reserve Bank had lowered the official cash rate for the first time since 2020. In the following two quarters, following my statement, GDP rose by 0.4 percent and then 0.9 percent. Business confidence was high. So, yes, there were certainly green shoots of recovery. Like many recoveries, there have been bumps along the way.
Hon Dr Deborah Russell: Why did she claim in October 2024 that "The green shoots of business confidence are re-emerging.", when construction liquidations are up 23 percent, retail liquidations are up 16 percent, and hospitality liquidations are up 41 percent, just in the last year?
Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Because current activity in the retail sector recorded the highest response in four years; because building consents in terms of the monthly numbers are the highest in two years; and because the October ANZ Business Outlook showed a jump in confidence, the highest in six months.
Hon Dr Deborah Russell: Why did she claim on 5 November 2025 that an economic recovery is under way; the same day that we learnt that 160,000 people are now unemployed, the highest since 1994?
Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Because, as economic literature concludes, the foundations for an economic recovery are inflation back in target, interest rates reducing, and the conditions for investment and growth. Our Government has rebuilt those foundations that you trashed.
SPEAKER: No, I didn't trash anything, and it's not appropriate to use a question to attack the Opposition. [Interruption]. I beg your pardon; who's speaking at the moment?
Hon Dr Deborah Russell: Is Winston Peters correct that "We've got a situation where we haven't turned the economy around in the way we should have, as fast as we should have. I know it can be turned around but not with this sort of strategy where you're not actually fixing the economy."; if not, why not?
Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Well, Winston Peters is one of 20 Ministers around the Cabinet table who are absolutely of the shared, collective view that we need to do more to recover this economy, to have it growing faster. I am in complete agreement with him about that. I'll tell you what we all agree won't help, and that's loading more taxes on to every business and KiwiSaver account in the country.
Hon Dr Deborah Russell: Point of order, Mr Speaker.
SPEAKER: I'm not calling you just yet. There are people who are constantly calling out during the answer to a question, in order to drown out what the answer is. If that continues, that and those people will need to leave the House.
Hon Dr Deborah Russell: Point of order Mr Speaker. In that last answer, the Minister of Finance—I hope it was deliberately, because I can't think why she would have done it otherwise—deliberately mislead the House about the nature of our tax policy; there is no tax on KiwiSaver, there is no tax on businesses.
SPEAKER: There was no particular allegation made in that, from what I was able to hear of it.
Hon Dr Deborah Russell: Who should Kiwis believe: the Minister of Finance last week that, "A hard-won"—
SPEAKER: Sorry, just a minute. Why are backbenchers from the Government speaking during the asking of a question?
Hon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL: Who should Kiwis believe: the Minister of Finance last week that "A hard-won economic recovery is now under way.", or Winston Peters this morning, that her Government "has failed to run the economy properly"?
Hon NICOLA WILLIS: I think New Zealanders should believe me, and they should also believe Winston Peters, that we want to turn the economy recovery around faster. I'll tell you, if we're talking about the question of who should be believed, believe you this: your capital gains tax will hit every business and KiwiSaver fund in the country.
Hon Dr Deborah Russell: Point of order, Mr Speaker. The Minister of Finance is incorrect. Our capital gains tax will not hit KiwiSaver, will not hit businesses. She is completely misrepresenting us.
SPEAKER: It would be a debatable point that I'm not going to rule on.
Hon Dr Deborah Russell: Why should New Zealanders believe her repeated declarations of an economic recovery when since mid-last year the economy has entered recession, unemployment is at long-term highs, food prices are up, and record numbers are fleeing for better opportunities offshore?
Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Because I am the finance Minister in a Government that has delivered tax relief to working people. I am the Minister of Finance in a Government that has got inflation back under control after three years of a cost of living crisis under the last lot. I am the Minister of Finance in a Government that has seen interest rates fall, and I am the Minister of Finance who says no to a capital gains tax on businesses, KiwiSaver funds, and hard-working Kiwis.
Hon Chris Bishop: Point of order. I seek leave for the Hon Deborah Russell to ask two more supplementary questions on this question.
SPEAKER: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? The Hon Deborah Russell.
Hon Dr Deborah Russell: Why—[Interruption]
SPEAKER: Questions are heard in silence.
Hon Dr Deborah Russell: Why should New Zealanders believe the claims that the Minister of Finance has made about data points when the lived experience of everyday New Zealanders is that they cannot get appointments at the doctor, that the cost of living is up, and that they simply cannot afford to live in this country?
Hon NICOLA WILLIS: From the tax lecturer, I'd expect she would understand that when the data shows that price increases have been far lower in terms of inflation, that food price inflation is far lower than it was under her Government—those are real facts that matter—and because it is absolutely the case that were we to have a Government with a higher inflation target and more taxes on everyone, things would be a lot worse. That's the alternative prescription you're proposing.
Hon Dr Deborah Russell: Does the Minister of Finance understand that even though the rate of inflation has decreased that still means that prices are going up and still means that New Zealanders are still worse off every week because her Government is failing to fix this economy? [Interruption]
SPEAKER: Just calm it right down. [Interruption] Just wait. Calm it right down.
Hon NICOLA WILLIS: I well understand and actually have daily recourse to reflect on the fact that when inflation has got as high as 7.3 percent—as it did under the last Government—and when that is sustained for a significant period of time it does bake-in prices across the economy at a higher level. Actually, bringing that back down again takes a lot of work. I also reflect on the fact that when a Government puts forward proposals to reduce inflation; to increase supermarket competition by fast-tracking new supermarkets, to increase jobs by fast-tracking new housing developments, new ports; when a Government reduces tax on investments that businesses make, it is supporting growth. When other people stand up in this House and say that their one solution is more tax on the economy, I wouldn't take them seriously.
5. CATHERINE WEDD (National—Tukituki) to the Minister of Health: What announcement has he made about improving access to timely, quality healthcare services in Hawke's Bay?
Hon SIMEON BROWN (Minister of Health): Today, I announced the completion of stage one of the radiology upgrade at Hawke's Bay Fallen Soldiers' Memorial Hospital. This upgrade is part of a $35.8 million investment to double imaging capacity and deliver more than 10,000 additional MRI and CT scans each year for Hawke's Bay patients. These significant upgrades are all part of our focus on putting patients first and will help Hawke's Bay patients get the answers and treatments they need sooner. My thanks go to the project team, who delivered this critical project within a year of funding being allocated.
Catherine Wedd: What benefits will this project deliver for patients in Hawke's Bay?
Hon SIMEON BROWN: The first stage has delivered an additional 808 square metres of floor space, and from next week a second MRI scanner will provide 4,000 to 6,000 extra scans per year, and a second CT scanner will double CT capacity with 6,000 to 10,000 extra scans annually. The facility has been designed to maximize efficiency, with dedicated spaces for patient preparation and post-scan care, to get as many scans done—for timely, quality access to radiology services in Hawke's Bay.
Catherine Wedd: How will these upgrades support the Government's health targets?
Hon SIMEON BROWN: These upgrades directly support our health targets to reduce wait times for patients. For cancer treatment, CT wait times will now consistently meet the two-week target. Increased CT capacity means faster access to urgent imaging and quicker clinical decision-making, helping reduce emergency department stays. Expanded imaging will also streamline diagnostic pathways for first specialist assessments and support faster treatment planning for elective procedures.
Catherine Wedd: What other projects are under way to improve access to timely, quality healthcare in Hawke's Bay?
Hon SIMEON BROWN: Good news for Hawke's Bay: Health New Zealand is delivering a rapid-build ward with 28 beds to boost capacity at the hospital and reduce wait times for patients. We're also progressing a linear accelerator and bunker to improve services for patients needing cancer treatment in Hawke's Bay; and more good news: the third endoscopy room will open later this month, further boosting diagnostic capacity. There's a lot of work under way in Hawke's Bay as part of our focus on putting patients first.
6. LAURA McCLURE (ACT) to the Minister for Children: What recent reports has she seen on serious and persistent youth offending?
Hon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children): I have seen a recent independent evaluation report on the Military-Style Academy (MSA) Pilot which shows two-thirds of participants reduced the frequency or seriousness of their offending in the six months after the residential phase of the pilot. I want to acknowledge these young people who have taken this opportunity to make better choices, but I also want to acknowledge all the staff who have been involved, including the mentors and social workers helping these young people. The Military-Style Academy Pilot had a real focus on the transition back into the community, and we have seen some good results.
Laura McClure: What else did the independent evaluation report show about the outcomes of Military-Style Academy Pilot participants?
Hon KAREN CHHOUR: Comparing the six months before the residential phase to the six months after the pilot, participants reduced their violent offending by 67 percent. To put the outcomes of this group into context, the participants in the MSA pilot were matched with a cohort of nine other young people. The MSA cohort had longer periods of non-offending than the matched cohort. The independent report shows there were wider benefits too, including involvement in education, work experience and employment; improved physical and mental health; reconnection with whānau; and stable living situations. The evidence shows that these are all important protective factors that young people need as a foundation to be a success in life.
Laura McClure: What have been some of the other outcomes for the young people in the Military-Style Academy Pilot?
Hon KAREN CHHOUR: There have been 11 young people in total involved in the pilot. One elected to leave the programme in the first couple of weeks. One young man tragically passed away in a car accident, and my thoughts go out to his family. Seven of the 11 had some alleged reoffending, generally at a lower level than before the pilot; and five of those are now back out in the community, and I'm told they're doing well with no further offending. Reoffending rates are not the only measure of success. Every single one of these young people has the potential to do amazing things with their lives and become the best versions of themselves, and I hope they can achieve that moving forward.
Laura McClure: What is the Government's record on youth crime?
Hon KAREN CHHOUR: There has been a 16 percent reduction in children and young people with serious and persistent offending behaviour. We have taken an issue that was out of control and achieved our Government target four years ahead of schedule. We've invested in and expanded the few things that were showing results, like the fast track programme, but we also brought more accountability for young people and their actions. We're getting on with the important work of fixing what matters.
7. Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Labour) to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by his statement that the health system is "finally turning a corner"; if not, why not?
Hon SIMEON BROWN (Minister of Health): In the context it was made, yes. We're seeing steady improvements, with more Kiwis getting care sooner and wait times coming down. Patients are at the heart of everything we do and after years of decline, the health system is starting to move in the right direction. We have brought back health targets—because you can't manage what you don't measure—and we're now seeing those results show up for patients. There is still a lot more work to do. Too many New Zealanders are still waiting too long to get the care that they need. We are making progress, but we won't stop until every Kiwi can access timely, quality healthcare.
Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: When Christchurch emergency department spent over a third of its winter days in code red, was it turning a corner?
Hon SIMEON BROWN: The majority of patients at Christchurch Hospital were being seen within six hours, and we are now measuring that through the health target which the previous Government removed. What I would point out to the member is that the last Government decided to remove the health target for shorter stays in emergency departments. The number of patients which were being seen within six hours when Labour came to office was 89.2 percent; when they left, it was 67.5 percent.
Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Is 400 patients attending Christchurch emergency department on every day in September a sign that the health system is turning a corner, or a sign that more people can't afford to see their doctor in the community?
Hon SIMEON BROWN: Each year, we see increased presentations at our emergency departments due to population—
Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Because each year, you let GP fees go higher.
Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, if she's going to talk about GP fees, Labour let GP fees increased by 30 percent in their six years in Government. That is on Chris Hipkins and the Labour Party. What we're focused on is making sure that we're investing in primary care, investing in the workforce that's needed, and we are having to turn around a health system which the Labour Party decided to restructure during the middle of a pandemic.
Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Is that emergency department being crowned the busiest department in New Zealand and possibly Australasia a sign that the Canterbury health system is turning a corner, or that successful systems for keeping people out of hospital in the community have fallen apart?
Hon SIMEON BROWN: As the member will know, if people need to have emergency care, they should go to an emergency department, but we also need to make sure that we're investing across our health system. That's why I'm proud that, under this Government, we have made a record investment in primary care this year, and a record investment in the primary care workforce, all whilst the previous Government increased GP fees by 30 percent.
Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Is erecting a tent care facility outside the Christchurch emergency department a sign that the health system is turning a corner, or a sign that it is in terminal decline?
Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, I'm not aware that that was done at that hospital, but what I would say is that, under her Government, she allowed GP fees to increase by 30 percent; and, whilst we are focused on trying to improve access to primary care through our Primary Care Tactical Action Plan, the Labour Party still won't answer a simple question: do they support extended prescriptions to 12 months, which will save patients $105 per year and improve access to general practitioners? Why won't the Labour Party say whether or not they support that policy?
8. GREG FLEMING (National—Maungakiekie) to the Minister for Mental Health: What recent announcement has the Government made about combating methamphetamine harm?
Hon MATT DOOCEY (Minister for Mental Health): The best way to take a drug is not to take it at all. The reality is meth destroys people's lives, rips families apart, and harms our communities. That's why the Government released a bold and comprehensive action plan to combat the harm caused by meth. We're taking action to reduce demand by increasing the range of addiction services in our communities that have been hard hit by this drug. The health actions are just part of a wider plan across Customs, police, and justice to combat organised crime and give people the support they need. Whether it's your child, a friend, or a family member reaching out for support, this Government is committed to ensuring support is there.
Greg Fleming: How will the Government's action plan reduce demand and boost intensive treatment services?
Hon MATT DOOCEY: One of my top priorities is to improve access to addiction support so we can ensure that when someone takes a brave step of reaching out, that support is there. We've invested an extra $30 million to deliver faster access to support by rolling out screening, brief intervention, and referral for treatment services in seven hospitals; boosting existing treatment services so they can scale up; training more front-line workers while also upskilling the existing workforce; and establishing new community early intervention and peer support services. Behind every one of these new services will be hundreds of Kiwis getting the support they need.
Greg Fleming: How will the Government's methamphetamine action plan help prevent people from starting to use meth?
Hon MATT DOOCEY: The Government's health response to meth is focused on "stop people from starting", "start people stopping", and "keeping people stopped". By expanding the Tūturu programme, we can get in a lot earlier and actually stop our kids from starting. We know engagement with education is a powerful protective factor for preventing drug use. Tūturu has been shown to improve outcomes for our young people by reducing the number of students being stood down, suspended, or excluded. There will also be a hard-hitting national media campaign from the proceeds of crime fund. This campaign will raise public awareness about the dangers of meth and show that support is available. The Government is not just focused on ensuring the right support is in place but on preventing Kiwis from getting to that point.
Greg Fleming: How will the Government's plan to combat meth deliver more early intervention and peer support services?
Hon MATT DOOCEY: Our mental health and addiction plan is working, with 77 percent of people seen within three weeks for specialist drug and alcohol support, with a growing front-line workforce, with our addiction workforce vacancy rates down by 17 percent. We don't want people to get discouraged from reaching out for support. If someone is ready to get treatment, then that support needs to be there. That's why we're boosting community-based early intervention and peer support funding which will increase access to recovery groups, which are proven to support long-term abstinence. Increasing availability of these programmes in areas hardest hit by meth will ensure the right services are ready to support those who want to stop using. Our priority is to improve access to support so more Kiwis can get the help they need when and where it's needed.
9. Hon MARAMA DAVIDSON (Co-Leader—Green) 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?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister): Yes.
Hon Marama Davidson: Does he think it undermines the mana of the Royal Commission of Inquiry to continue with boot camps in the face of unequivocal opposition from survivors and care-experienced youth?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: What I'm proud about is this Government has seen a 16 percent reduction in serious youth offending, which was completely out of control under a Labour-Greens Government. Our change to our general approach on law and order is working.
Hon Marama Davidson: Does he stand by his statement that his boot camps are "a powerful targeted intervention", or does he accept findings that the boot camps had insufficient preparation, therapeutic support, and individual intervention due to a lack of capacity?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Yes, they're an important part of lowering serious youth offending, which is down 16 percent under this Government.
Hon Marama Davidson: Does he accept that expanding boot camps, despite official advice saying they're costly and ineffective, is a mistake, when community-based, trauma-informed solutions, like Ngāpuhi social services youth remand programme, are having far better outcomes?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Serious youth offending's down 16 percent and the community is safer.
Hon Marama Davidson: Why is it a priority to invest in millions of dollars in boot camps when care-experienced youth implore the Government to instead fund properly trained staff, better access to education and healthcare, and safe therapeutic spaces in existing residences?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Because this is a Government that doesn't believe a 30 percent increase in violent crime, a 51 percent growth in gang membership, a doubling of retail crime, and a quadrupling of ram raids is what is needed. This is a Government that's invested in restoring law and order. That's why there are 29,000 less victims of serious violent crime, that is why serious youth offending is down 16 percent, that is why there is growth in police out on the beat, and ram raids are down 85 percent.
Hon Marama Davidson: Is the Prime Minister attributing the 70 percent drop to boot camps?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Can you clarify what drop, please?
Hon Marama Davidson: In crime and reoffending. Is the Prime Minister—
SPEAKER: Is that the same question or not? You've had an answer.
Hon Marama Davidson: No, he didn't address it. He asked for it to be— [Interruption]
SPEAKER: Rhetorically, that's right, but it is addressing the question.
10. MIKE BUTTERICK (National—Wairarapa) to the Minister for Hunting and Fishing: What recent announcements has he made about Herds of Special Interest?
Hon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing): On Saturday, I was with the Prime Minister at the hugely successful Sika Show, where we announced the opening of public consultation on the draft herd management plans for wapiti deer in parts of Fiordland National Park and sika deer in the Kaimanawa and Kāweka forest parks. These plans outline a proposed new approach to sustainably managing these two herds. The changes will allow hunter-led conservation groups to better manage herd numbers, improve our native biodiversity, and create opportunities for economic growth and jobs in those regions.
Mike Butterick: Why are these draft herd management plans needed?
Hon JAMES MEAGER: A herd management plan is required before the Minister can designate a Herd of Special Interest. These draft plans contain the blueprint for how we can sustainably manage sika and wapiti deer numbers, enhance ecological monitoring, strengthen community stewardship of the herds, and improve our biodiversity. These plans are now open for public consultation so that all members can make a contribution and ensure that we reflect the values of our local communities in Fiordland and in the Central Plateau.
Mike Butterick: How will Herds of Special Interest influence conservation outcomes?
Hon JAMES MEAGER: Herds of Special Interest represent an exciting opportunity for all New Zealanders to better sustainably manage deer numbers in these two herds. By managing these herds for their hunting attributes, we can achieve smaller herd numbers and healthier animals. That means better environmental outcomes, enhanced canopy recovery, better meat recovery for our whānau and families, and more valuable hunting opportunities. It is a win-win for hunting and conservation.
Mike Butterick: How can Kiwis have their say on draft herd management plans?
Hon JAMES MEAGER: Anyone, including members, can have their say on the Department of Conservation website. I would like to encourage all interested parties to have their say. Let us know what needs to be improved or changed in order for these plans to deliver the best possible Herds of Special Interest. Consultation opened on Monday and is open until Monday, 8 December.
Cameron Luxton: How does a Herd of Special Interest management plan recognise the hard work that hunters do on the ground as conservationists?
Hon JAMES MEAGER: Fantastic question, from one of our best hunter-conservationists in this House. These draft plans highlight the fact that hunters are one of our biggest conservation assets, and the plans actually acknowledge the contribution that they make to maintaining a healthy ecosystem. I can only point to examples of the great work done by the Central North Island Sika Foundation in leading the Kaimanawa whio duck recovery project or the Fiordland Wapiti Foundation, who operate over 500 predator control traps. These are just some of the many, many, many examples of hunter-led conservation in New Zealand.
11. Hon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) to the Lead Coordination Minister for the Government's Response to the Royal Commission's Report into Historical Abuse in State Care and in the Care of Faith-based Institutions: Does she stand by her statement regarding her abuse in care redress decisions in May that "here is what we can do now, we can do quickly, we can get in place so that we can prioritise that certainty and surety for survivors"; if so, why?
Hon ERICA STANFORD (Lead Coordination Minister for the Government's Response to the Royal Commission's Report into Historical Abuse in State Care and in the Care of Faith-based Institutions): Can I first acknowledge the National Day of Reflection for abuse in care tomorrow. In response to the question: yes, in context. The context was about prioritising improvements to the current State redress system that could be delivered quickly and would make an immediate difference to survivors. So I can advise the House that since those comments were made in May, in the June to September quarter, 1,056 new claims for abuse in care were lodged with agencies. This is a 114 percent increase in new claims on the previous quarter. This shows that survivors have responded to the certainty that the Government redress decisions provided. In addition, over $13 million has been paid in top-up payments to over 1,100 survivors. This is an average of almost $12,000 per survivor.
Hon Willow-Jean Prime: How has the Minister prioritised speed and certainty for survivors when a survivor died before getting her claim settled because she had to fill in additional forms about her criminal history?
Hon ERICA STANFORD: There is a process for those who are terminally ill to have an exemption from that process. The process is that it comes directly to me and I sign it off. One of those has come to me and it was signed off on the same day it was delivered. In that particular situation, Health New Zealand did not follow the correct process, but I can advise that the payment will be made to the estate of that survivor.
Hon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME: Is lawyer Sonja Cooper correct to ask, "Why should somebody who is terminally ill, hospitalised, unable to move, in their last [few] weeks or months of life, why should they be put through this additional hurdle to get redress when it is hard enough, in any event, to go through the redress processes?"
Hon ERICA STANFORD: There is no additional step. The exact same step that you have to follow when you are terminally ill as a survivor to get your claim expedited is exactly the same as to get through this other process. All you have to do is show that you are terminally ill. It's the same process. There is no additional step. So the person who is terminally ill provides the report to show they're terminally ill and, in the back end, we do all the rest. There is no additional step for the survivor.
Hon Willow-Jean Prime: Why is she requiring survivors to fill in forms about their criminal offending before the legislation is even passed?
Hon ERICA STANFORD: Well, if the member were to read the legislation, she'd understand the answer to that question.
Hon Willow-Jean Prime: Why did she inform a survivor that their claim was not paused when the Ministry of Social Development told them their claims could not progress to settlement until the legislation is finalised or the new declaration and consent forms are ready?
Hon ERICA STANFORD: I don't remember saying that. If the member wants to put that in writing to me, I'll be able to respond.
Hon Willow-Jean Prime: Why did she promise speed, certainty, and surety for survivors in her May announcement, yet months later, claims were not progressing because of her new legislation and new forms?
Hon ERICA STANFORD: Well, since we have made that announcement, we have put a huge amount of resource into making sure that there are more people processing claims. I can say that we took the amount of claims being processed from 1,100 a year up to 1,550 a year, and this year we are on track to exceed that number because of the hard work that we are doing. So we are providing more certainty and more surety to survivors, and that is exemplified in the fact that more survivors are coming forward to make their claims.
12. CHLÖE SWARBRICK (Co-Leader—Green) 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?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister): Yes.
Chlöe Swarbrick: Can the Prime Minister guarantee that every New Zealander—particularly our young people—can get the support that they need to prevent them from sleeping homeless on the street tonight?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, that's what this Government is going. We've done a good job of making sure housing affordability is in place for owners and renters; we've taken about 5,000 people off the social housing wait-list; we've taken people out of emergency housing; and we're continuing to support people who are in homeless situations.
Chlöe Swarbrick: Why will the Prime Minister not commit to ensuring that all New Zealanders—especially our young people—get the support that they need to prevent them from sleeping rough on the street tonight?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, this Government's undertaken quite a few actions, as was announced by Ministers just recently. We've put $10 million of additional funding into support services for rough sleepers in exactly that situation; we've expanded the Housing First programme with another 300 spaces—I think 100 of the 300 have been allocated already, and 200 of the 300 are actually in Auckland itself.
Rt Hon Winston Peters: What's the local MP doing about it?
Chlöe Swarbrick: Can the Prime Minister guarantee that a job is available for every young person who he has decided to make access to the jobseeker support more difficult for?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, this is a Government that wants to see young people connected to employment, training, and education, and we are putting expectations on our 18- to 19-year-olds to do exactly that.
Chlöe Swarbrick: Has the Prime Minister read the advice to his Government from his officials that introducing his new barriers to young people's access to jobseeker support will not reduce barriers to employment and could actually increase unemployment, or is he just ignoring like he did the advice that his decisions would make more people homeless?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I'm proud of our record on housing, and when I consider that against a Labour - Greens Government that had a fourfold increase in State housing wait-lists, that actually drove up house prices by 30 percent in a single year, and drove rents up $180 per week—we've taken 3,000 people out of emergency housing and put them into homes, and we are supporting homelessness. When the Greens member had their own Minister, homelessness went up 37 percent despite spending a billion dollars on it. Our record on housing beats that record on housing any day of the week.
Chlöe Swarbrick: If the Prime Minister chose to resource housing and job creation for all of our young people, would it cost more or less than his $3 billion tax cut to landlords?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I'm actually proud of the tax cuts that we made to working New Zealanders—the people that Labour and the Greens used to purport to care about, but didn't, and didn't support that initiative.
Chlöe Swarbrick: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek leave of the House to address the questions from one of our co-Deputy Prime Ministers about what the Auckland Central MP is doing about this homelessness issue—
SPEAKER: Sorry, I can't—
Chlöe Swarbrick: —which this Government has exacerbated.
SPEAKER: Sorry—[Interruption] I'm sorry—[Interruption] Excuse me. I didn't hear what she just said. Could you say it slowly and clearly?
Chlöe Swarbrick: I was seeking leave of the House to address the questions put to me by one of our co-Deputy Prime Ministers about what the Auckland Central MP is doing about the issue of homelessness, which this Government has exacerbated.
SPEAKER: No, you can't seek leave on behalf of someone else.
Hon Shane Jones: In relation to jobseeker support, is the Prime Minister aware that a couple of Māoris are about to become unemployed?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, this is a Government that actually offers support to all New Zealanders.
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Have Ministers received any advice—
SPEAKER: Sorry—sorry, Rt Hon Chris Hipkins, there are people behind you speaking. There are people throughout the House who are speaking. The next one who speaks will be leaving.
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Have Ministers received any advice on potential law changes to move-on homeless people from central business districts, and, if Ministers have, why did the Prime Minister tell the House last week that they hadn't?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Because the member's question was different from the one that he's just posed now. I'd just say that the Minister for Auckland, as I have said subsequently over the course of the last week, is going to do everything we can to make sure that the CBD is safe for Aucklanders. When we have cruise season upon us, when we have major events, a convention centre, and the City Rail Link opening up, we want people to be able to go into the Auckland CBD and not be intimidated. We are considering move-on orders, but we need to make sure the support is in place so that those folk, when they are moved-on, actually have somewhere to go and we don't move the problem around the city.
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Will he guarantee—
SPEAKER: Wait on—just wait for the House to settle itself. This is a bad day. There is too much discussion going on on the Government benches while questions are being asked.
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Will he guarantee that homeless people won't simply be moved into outer suburbs or other areas out of CBDs because they don't have anywhere to go?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: What I can guarantee is that we are not a Government that is putting emergency housing and 501 deportees into downtown Auckland CBD to create unsafe environments for other citizens. We take this very seriously—that's why we've increased police on the beat in the CBD, and that has helped in some dimensions. That is why a Minister for Auckland is actually engaging with NGOs, Government agencies, and local government to actually identify what solutions—together, collectively—we can do. That is important.
Hon Shane Jones: Can the Prime Minister confirm that thousands of visitors to Queen Street fear for their own safety and that it's not purely an issue of homelessness, but potential criminality, drug taking, and people defending victimhood?
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Yes, I can. Many Aucklanders in Auckland refuse to go into the CBD for exactly that reason. We are opening up cruise ship season, where visitors from overseas are coming to our country, and that is their experience in the Auckland CBD. We will fix it up—
SPEAKER: Prime Minister—
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: —another mess created by the Labour - Greens Government—
SPEAKER: Prime Minister—
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: —but we'll sort it out.
SPEAKER: Just stop. We're going to hear the answer in absolute silence. Barracking across the House like that is totally unacceptable.
Hon Kieran McAnulty: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Sir, I don't dispute that direction whatsoever, but it needs to be pointed out that it is extremely difficult to expect order in the House when Ministers regularly ignore the clear guidance and direction that you have given on the quality of answers. The Prime Minister, just then, used that answer, given to him by his own Minister, to have a swipe at the Opposition. No wonder there was disorder as a result.
SPEAKER: Well, the reality is that I just couldn't hear it—that's why I intervened and said we'll hear it in silence. If there is such commentary, it'll be stopped.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: No New Zealander wants to see homelessness in this country. The previous Government would acknowledge that they spent a billion dollars on emergency housing, and homelessness went up 37 percent. That only speaks to the complexity of the issues around homelessness. What we are doing as a Government is working with many agencies and NGOs to actually get a solution in Auckland CBD, because it has to change. It will be different, and this Government will get that job done.
Home Page | Parliament | Previous Story | Next Story
Copyright (c) Scoop Media