Sitting date: 30 July 2025

ORAL QUESTIONS

QUESTIONS TO MINISTERS

Question No. 1—Prime Minister

1. 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: Why did Te Whatu Ora only hire 45 percent of the mid-year cohort of nursing graduates last year when, at the same time, over half of all day shifts in surgical wards across 16 health districts were understaffed, putting patients at risk and increasing wait times?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I'd just say they are all understaffed today, and there's 1,500 people that sadly aren't getting their elective surgeries. That will cause a huge amount of pain and suffering for New Zealanders. What I'd just say on nurses is that we hugely value our nurses. They do an exceptionally, exceptionally good job. [Interruption] There has been good effort over improving remuneration over a number of years—

SPEAKER: I'm sorry, Prime Minister. If people have got a question, they should stand, seek the call, and then ask it, not yell it across the House.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: As I was saying, there's been concerted effort to improve the remuneration of nurses over a number of years. If you think back to 2011, nurse pay has increased, I think, 74 percent. That's double what it has been across the whole of the economy. We have average nurse pay now at $125,000, including overtime allowances. It's comparable to New South Wales, yet New South Wales is 35 percent wealthier than New Zealand. Then, equally, if you look at the starting nursing salary, it's up almost 11 percent between today and what it will be in June 2026. So there has been work going on about seriously making sure our nurses are well remunerated, but what we need to make sure is that the unions need to get back to the table and negotiate, because it's pretty unfair when 1,500 Kiwis are sitting there today having had their surgeries cancelled.

Hon Marama Davidson: Why has Te Whatu Ora said that financial constraints are the reason it cannot afford to employ more nurses to achieve safe staffing levels at the same time that his Government is giving billions in tax cuts and subsidies for landlords, international tobacco companies, and fossil fuel corporations?

SPEAKER: Just a minute, I'm sorry. If we're going to get pedantic about questions—I've been asked to consider that by the Hon Kieran McAnulty—then it doesn't matter which part of the question you might add a commentary in; it is not part of the question. It's a statement that is largely found in your belief of how things are. Just ask the question, please.

Hon Marama Davidson: Why has Te Whatu Ora said that financial constraints are the reason it cannot afford to employ more nurses to achieve safe staffing levels?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I'll just say to the member that, actually, Health New Zealand has hired 2,100 extra nurses since we came to Government. Importantly, retention of our nurses has improved, with attrition rates moving from 14 percent down to 8 percent over the last two years. We have made huge investments in health—the biggest investment in health of any Government in the history of New Zealand, up $17 billion last year, up another 7 percent this year, and a billion dollars extra going into infrastructure. We've been working on nurse remuneration, as I outlined in my answer to the first question, and we're making good progress there. I'd just say to the union, get round the table, negotiate, and don't put 1,500 people's surgeries at risk.

Hon Marama Davidson: Then how are minimum-wage workers, nurses, and teachers meant to shoulder rising costs like household energy bills, which have gone up 8.4 percent in the last year, with pay increases of 1 percent per year or less?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I just said to the member, if I just take her through nurses' pay, it's gone up 74 percent since 2011. It's double what it has been on average across the economy. Nurse pay, now—we should be proud about—is at $125,000, including allowances and including overtime, and that's comparable to New South Wales despite them being much wealthier. As I said, starting nursing salary goes from, I think, $75,773 up another $8,400 between now and June next year, and that's an 11 percent increase. Inflation's at 2.5 percent.

Hon Marama Davidson: What does he say to Tracy Black from Whakatāne, who says, "Every day we look after someone's mum, dad, auntie, koro, pēpē, sibling, but without enough nurses, we're forced to make impossible choices.", and how does he justify his choices to dish out billions in tax cuts?

SPEAKER: No, you can't go on that. You've asked the question.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, in answer to the first part of the question, the member is just plain wrong. We have spent more money on healthcare than any previous Government. We've spent $32 billion on healthcare. One out of every $5 of Government expenditure is going into our healthcare system. We have hired 2,100 more nurses and 600 more doctors, we have got clarity on the targets and what their outcomes are going to be for patients and made it a patient-focused endeavour, and we're improving the efficiency of Health New Zealand to deliver those people and money, to deliver improved patient outcomes.

Hon Marama Davidson: When exactly will his Government recognise Palestinian statehood?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, we've had a longstanding position, as the member well understands, about a two-State solution. It's a question, as you've heard the Foreign Minister say, of when, not if. But, right here, right now, in the next 24 hours, what we need the world and everyone focused on is making sure that Hamas releases hostages. We need to make sure that Israel gives unfettered humanitarian assistance and actually respects territorial integrity so it doesn't undermine the conditions for a two-State solution. We need to have diplomacy and dialogue and a ceasefire. That's what we need to focus on right here, right now.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Prime Minister, is someone who falsely claims that the Government is giving money to big tobacco a total economic illiterate?

SPEAKER: Well, that wasn't actually asked, because it wasn't an allowed question.

Question No. 2—Finance

2. Dr VANESSA WEENINK (National—Banks Peninsula) to the Minister of Finance: What recent announcements has she made about competition?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance): This morning I announced that Kiwibank's parent company Kiwi Group Capital (KGC) has been given approval by the Government to raise up to $500 million from New Zealand professional investment groups to fund the bank's growth. This is the first step towards giving the bank access to the capital it needs to truly compete with the big four Aussie banks while retaining its intrinsic New Zealand identity. Advice to the Government is that an additional $500 million of capital could support up to $4 billion of business lending or $10 billion of home lending. That is sufficient to add competitive pressure to the market and potentially benefit customers from other banks as well Kiwibank.

Dr Vanessa Weenink: Why is the Government looking to increase Kiwibank's capital?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Last year, the Commerce Commission completed a market study into competition in the personal banking services sector. The study found that the four largest banks—ANZ, ASB, BNZ, and Westpac—did not face strong competition and that competition between them for customers was sporadic. This is to the detriment of bank customers in New Zealand. The commission recommended better capitalising Kiwibank to enable it to be a disruptive competitor. The Government agrees with the commission and is giving effect to its recommendations.

Dr Vanessa Weenink: Is this an asset sale?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: No, this is not an asset sale as all the funds raised will go to Kiwibank to support its future business growth. There is no return of capital to the Crown. A future Government may choose to publicly list Kiwibank to raise further capital, but that won't occur without an electoral mandate. Irrespective of any future decisions, the Government has approved measures to safeguard the bank's New Zealand identity. These measures include maintaining at least 51 percent Government ownership of KGC for the foreseeable future, and through a Kiwi share to be held by the Crown requiring, among other measures, a majority of the directors of KGC to be normally resident in New Zealand, and Kiwibank maintaining its principal place of business in New Zealand.

Dr Vanessa Weenink: When will we know if an investment in Kiwibank is occurring?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Kiwi Group Capital has until 30 June next year to complete a capital raise. Giving it this amount of time will allow KGC to take account of market conditions, investor feedback, and the timing of Kiwibank's financial results release. The capital raise will be subject to final approval of terms and conditions from shareholding Ministers and Ministers will only approve the transaction if risks have been appropriately managed and the transaction is consistent with the Government's interests. Further announcements will be made when it is appropriate to do so, bearing in mind the commercial sensitivity of negotiations between Kiwi Group Capital and potential investors.

Question No. 3—Prime Minister

3. 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: Why are pay rises for board directors a higher priority for him than paying teachers and nurses properly?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: They're not.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: How many New Zealanders are currently unemployed, jobless, or part-time, and looking for more work?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, as the member will understand, there has been an increase in unemployment, and that is a function of reckless Government spending, leading to high inflation, high interest rates, putting an economy into recession. When you are a business and you are faced with high inflation and less demand, you get squeezed, and you end up having—sadly—to lay off workers. As we have said and discussed yesterday, that has peaked and is peaking about now. With the work that this Government's doing to get our economy growing, we expect unemployment to continue to trend down as we go forward from here.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Does he know how many New Zealanders are unemployed, jobless, or part-time, and looking for more work?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Jobseeker numbers are about 206,000, from memory.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Why is he unaware, as Prime Minister, that over 400,000 New Zealanders are unemployed, jobless, or part-time, and looking for more work?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, it's a different question. I gave you the jobseeker unemployment numbers.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Why should Kiwis have confidence in doubling down on an economic plan that the IMF predicts will see New Zealand have the highest rate of joblessness of all Asia-Pacific countries over the next two years?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I just would love the member to acknowledge—it's sort of like, as I've said before, it's being the guy that started the fire and then complaining about the smoke. It's sort of like—honestly, it is quite a perverse set of questions I get daily from here, from the other side. The reality is, we have unemployment because it's the last thing that happens when you recklessly run the economy with high spending, high inflation, high interest rates and put it into recession, which you did.

Hon Nicola Willis: Can the Prime Minister confirm that unemployment is tracking at almost exactly the levels that were forecast in the Pre-Election Fiscal Update, and, in fact, month on month, are a little bit lower than was being forecast by the previous Government?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Look, I agree. The member knows that the forecast that we're seeing and the numbers we're seeing today are exactly in the forecast that he issued before the election. He's just trying to be cute and trying to play politics.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Is the construction industry back on track, now that construction companies are collapsing at four times the rate they were before he became Prime Minister, with 758 construction firms going into liquidation in just the past year?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I'll just say that the real reason that the construction sector has faced some big challenges—and let's be clear, construction hits the booms and it hits the busts harder than any other sector in our economy—is because it's very reliant upon something called interest rates. And when interest rates go high, you actually have to borrow for development, and, as a result, that ends up squeezing and putting huge pressure on our construction firms. But I just want to say to the member: I appreciate the member's—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Sorry, does the member on the end of the front bench there have something that needs to be asked by way of supplementary question? Good, then don't ask it across the House like that.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I really appreciate the member's concern around construction workers and what's happening in the sector. But I can tell him that we have $207 billion in the infrastructure pipeline. We have $6 billion of real projects, some of which were announced by the member's previous Government, but we're getting shovels into the ground before Christmas. And the other piece I'd just say is: if he is so worried about construction jobs, why doesn't he do something like support fast track or RMA reforms or get one position on public-private partnerships (PPPs)?

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: So if everything the Government's doing in construction is working so well, will he take responsibility for the fact that since he became Prime Minister, 18,000 jobs have disappeared from the construction sector, a number that continues to grow every month under his leadership?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, this Government is doing everything it can. We have a $6 billion pipeline of Government projects between now and Christmas with shovels on the ground. We are building more schools and classrooms, we are building more houses, and we are doing more on hospital and health infrastructure. So we are doing everything we can to make sure that our construction sector is set up well, and I'd just say to the member: if you really cared about it—instead of the crocodile tears—get one position on PPPs.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: If that's so successful, why have we lost 6,000 high-skilled jobs, such as engineers, with civil contractors saying that they urgently need a lot more work to feed the industry because his Government has cut back on spending projects?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I disagree. This Government is committed to $6 billion worth of Government spending between now and Christmas. It's spending more on schools, hospitals, roads. If the member cares about it, support roads of national significance; support Investment Boost.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: So when he claimed earlier this year that he was "cracking open the construction industry", was he cracking it open in the way that a wrecking ball cracks open a building?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Too cute by half, isn't it? It's a lovely metaphor. But, actually, son, let me just say: we're getting the show on the road. We are picking up your mess. Unemployment's the last thing, given your woeful economic mismanagement. And construction—we are doing everything we can to power up that sector, and we are going to do that.

Question No. 4—Transport

4. CATHERINE WEDD (National—Tukituki) to the Minister of Transport: What steps has he taken to reduce councils' use of road cones in New Zealand?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP (Minister of Transport): Well—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Just hold on—hold on. You can't start before he even opens his mouth. That includes the National backbench, as well.

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: All New Zealanders are concerned about the overuse of road cones. Between 2020 and 2023, $778 million was spent on temporary traffic management and road cones; about two-thirds the size of Transmission Gully, in terms of expense. What we have done as a Government is we've got rid of this monster Code of practice for temporary traffic management—

Hon Peeni Henare: Kick it!

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: —which is 583—I may well kick it; just wait for the Instagram video—pages, which specifies down to the nearest centimetre where road cones need to be when they're working in the road space. We've replaced it with a guide which adopts a simple principle, which is: it should be risk-based and proportionate and based on common sense and pragmatism, rather than on overly prescriptive rules.

Catherine Wedd: What evidence does the Minister—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Hang on! Now you can start.

Catherine Wedd: What evidence does the Minister have that a risk-based approach to temporary management will work to reduce the number of road cones?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: I've got good news. The amount of money spent on temporary traffic management has reduced on our State highways from 15.8 percent of maintenance cost, down to 8.8 percent—it's about a halving—and from 6 percent of the cost of capital projects, down to just 2.3 percent. That's on the State highway network. Now what we're doing is saying to councils, "You've got to adopt the guide, not the code, and if you don't, no New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) Government money will flow, because we want the benefits we're seeing on the State highway network from NZTA to also apply on the local road network."

Catherine Wedd: Why is the Government making these changes to temporary traffic management?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: I've got some figures from quarter 3 this year, which show that of 12,000 inspections of temporary traffic management on local roads, over 3,000—which is about a quarter—were found to be completely redundant. In other words, a quarter of the time, people were driving past road cones and temporary traffic management that had no merit or need for at all. That, of course, drives people bananas and it slows people down and, of course, creates congestion, and, most of all, it's a waste of taxpayers' and ratepayers' money. We are taking action.

Question No. 5—Foreign Affairs

5. Hon PEENI HENARE (Labour) to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: Does he stand by his statement that "It is a matter of when, not if, New Zealand will recognise Palestine Statehood"; if not, why not?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Minister of Foreign Affairs): Yes, we steadfastly support the establishment of a Palestinian State and the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. We have done so for decades. As a strong proponent of the two-State solution, we wish to see an immediate end to the appalling humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza and for Israelis and Palestinians to be living side by side in peace and security. Very importantly, we have spoken to a range of countries all around the world, including speaking to the Palestinian Authority, who understand our position.

Hon Peeni Henare: Is now the time for the New Zealand Government to recognise Palestine as a State, and, if not, when?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: New Zealand has consistently said that we are willing to recognise Palestine—and that it is a question of when, not if—but we do need to see progress on some of the fundamental issues relating to a Palestinian State's legitimacy and viability, including representative governance, commitments to non-violence, regional support, and security guarantees for Israel. If we recognise the State of Palestine, New Zealand wants to know that what we are recognising is a legitimate, representative, viable political entity.

Hon Peeni Henare: How will he match his evolving stance on recognition of a Palestinian State with tangible actions now, such as further sanctions or desperately needed humanitarian support?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The reality was that we have already had sanctions with respect to people both in Palestine and in Israel, and we've continued, to the best that we possibly can, through various agencies, our financial aid and support.

Hon Peeni Henare: Is New Zealand ready to provide aid to Gaza immediately, in the case that Israel lifts its blockade, and, if not, what measures is he taking to make that happen?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Yes.

Simon Court: Would recognising the State of Palestine before Hamas—

Tākuta Ferris: Oh, e noho!

SPEAKER: Sorry, stop. Just stop there. Tākuta Ferris will stand, withdraw, and apologise. You don't interfere with the asking of a question.

Tākuta Ferris: I withdraw and apologise.

SPEAKER: Start again.

Simon Court: Would recognising the State of Palestine before Hamas has returned the hostages and laid down their weapons constitute a reward for acts of terrorism, and what, if any, conditions should be associated with New Zealand's recognition of such a State?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The answer to the first question is: that's most likely how it'll be interpreted. And the second part of the question is: that very condition is part of the request that we are making by way of demands—that they give back the hostages.

Hon Peeni Henare: Would New Zealand's recognition of a Palestinian State have even further conditions on Israel agreeing to a ceasefire; and will it be in line with that of the United Kingdom, or would it be unconditional like other partners?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: We are not going to adopt the colonial mindset of some MPs. We remember the Statute of—

Chlöe Swarbrick: You just said it was conditional!

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: We remember—listen, you might learn. We remember the Statute of Westminster 1933, adopted this country in full force in 1947. Those are the facts. Get an education. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: No, sorry. That's uncalled for on a matter like this—quite uncalled for.

Question No. 6—Prime Minister

6. 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: Why have Auckland Council outreach teams recorded a 90 percent increase in people sleeping rough if not, in the words of Auckland councillor Angela Dalton, recent Government policy changes have "made it harder to access emergency housing."?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, again, I'd say to the member, no Kiwi wants to see New Zealanders homeless. That's why this Government spends $550 million a year in different social services organisations. We're hoping to see whether there's anything more that we can do to get more efficiency from that spend and more results, but, of course, the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) remains open to support people who need help and assistance in housing. But I am incredibly proud that we've moved 2,100 kids out of motel accommodation, which seemed to be the policy of the last Government.

SPEAKER: Just wait till there is quiet across the House.

Chlöe Swarbrick: What exactly did the Prime Minister think would happen when his officials told him that his Government's emergency housing changes would "create rough sleeping, people living in cars, and overcrowding."?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I'm incredibly proud of the work that we're doing to make housing more affordable for New Zealanders. We are in a situation where rent is stable; it's probably come down about $5 a week versus being at $180 a week when we came to Government. We've taken 6,000 people out of the State house wait-list and got them into proper homes, and we've put 2,100 kids into homes by prioritising them if they've been in motels for longer than 12 weeks. We know that there's still work to do on homelessness, but we have services available to support, and we'll continue to look at that.

Chlöe Swarbrick: How exactly does someone prove that they did not "contribute to their own homelessness", as his Government now requires people to do in order to get help to stop them being homeless?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, again, MSD will have some criteria by which it engages with people who need assistance and help, and will work that through. But I'm just saying to the member, we know we have more work to do on housing, but it is actually about a supply of housing; it's about making it more affordable. The good news is that, actually, rents are stable for people who are renting; people who are on a State house wait-list, that wait-list is coming down after having been driven up four times by the previous Minister of Housing; and, actually, we've taken 2,100 kids in 1,000 households out of dank, dark motel rooms because we want to make sure they're in proper homes and houses. We continue to spend half a billion dollars with support organisations that can work with people with very complex needs—often in mental health, often in addiction—and will continue to do so.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Has the Prime Minister yet "considered in the context of my diary" the many invitations that I have made with him to visit Auckland Central and meet the people that he has made homeless?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I can just say to the member that the Minister for infrastructure and housing was there last Friday, meeting with the commissioner in Auckland, and very open for looking at better ways to deliver better outcomes. But as the member would well know, under a previous Labour-Greens Government, homelessness went up 37 percent. It is a complex issue, and this Government is working its way through the myriad of housing issues that exist, because they're often interrelated.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Could the Prime Minister name just one thing the local MP in Auckland Central's doing about homelessness?

Chlöe Swarbrick: Point of order. I'd like to seek leave of the House to answer that question.

SPEAKER: Well, no, look, it's—oh well, I'll put leave. Leave is requested. Is there any objection to that course of action? There is. [Interruption] I don't mind how long it takes the House to settle. It's a members' day, so members are using up their own time.

Hon Tama Potaka: Can the Prime Minister confirm that the housing insights briefing, which is often relied on by the other parties in this House, states that the reported increase in homelessness cannot be attributed just to changes in the emergency housing gateway and they may actually be reflective of broader economic and social contexts, amongst other factors?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I thank the member, and I thank the member for his serious work to actually do something about improving the condition of emergency housing in New Zealand. Thank you for your leadership on that. But I'd just say to the House: people who have been working in this space know how difficult and complex homelessness issues actually are.

Chlöe Swarbrick: And they blame you.

SPEAKER: Sorry, Prime Minister, sorry—you cannot yell out across the House like that. If it continues, it'll be an early afternoon. And don't look away, because the member knows who's been spoken to. It's like a—well, I won't say.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: We understand the issues are complex. We understand that there are no easy answers. We understand there are people with complex needs. But I'd just say to the member, as you well understand, in the previous Government, homelessness increased 37 percent, and there was a billion dollars a year being spent on emergency housing. So these are difficult issues, but we are working through homeownership, we're working through renting, we're working through social and State housing, and we're working through homelessness.

Hon Chris Bishop: Can the Prime Minister confirm that despite KiwiBuild, despite $1.4 billion spent on emergency housing, and despite billions given to Kāinga Ora, the number of people living in severe housing deprivation increased from 2018 to 2023?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I can; it went up 37 percent, of people living without shelter. The members on the other side conveniently forget having been the Ministers of homelessness.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Things aren't going well, are they, Prime Minister? The rear view mirror says it's quiet over there, by golly.

SPEAKER: Well, Mr McAnulty, when you've finished asking questions or, in this case, answering them for the Government, we'll move on.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: His answers are better.

SPEAKER: Well, don't make me judge that.

Question No. 7—Agriculture

7. GRANT McCALLUM (National—Northland) to the Minister of Agriculture: What recent reports has he seen on farmer confidence?

Hon NICOLA GRIGG (Associate Minister of Agriculture) on behalf of the Minister of Agriculture: There is great news out from the primary sector: farmer confidence has surged to the highest level in eight years, which included the six years of the previous Labour Government. The latest Federated Farmers confidence survey shows a remarkable shift in sentiment. Confidence has lifted to record levels, from negative 66 percent under the previous Government to a positive 33 percent this July. This is also reflected in the latest Rabobank Rural Confidence Survey, which saw a similar boost in confidence and farm profitability. This Government thanks the hard work of the 360,000 rural New Zealanders who get out of bed every day and do some real work.

SPEAKER: Good, and we'll have answers without advertorials.

Grant McCallum: What else did the surveys highlight?

Hon NICOLA GRIGG: The surveys highlight major improvements across key indicators like profitability being at the highest level ever recorded, with two-thirds of farms reporting they are making a profit. It showed an increase in productivity and, importantly, an increase in the positive direction for mental health. Pressures under this Government have eased significantly, with fewer farmers reporting stress compared to last year.

Grant McCallum: What has the Government done to improve farmer confidence?

Hon NICOLA GRIGG: Well, after six years of rising costs and massive uncertainty, our focus is on giving farmers the tools to do what they do best, and that is to lead the world in producing high-quality food and fibre. We're replacing the Resource Management Act, we're changing national directions, we've launched contestable wellbeing funds, and we've campaigned on getting Wellington out of farming, rebuilding confidence, and building a true partnership between farmers and Government.

Grant McCallum: Why is supporting farmers important to economic growth?

Hon NICOLA GRIGG: It's hugely important. Our farmers are, once again, driving the economic recovery of New Zealand. Our exports are set to surpass $60 billion—that is, "billion", with a "b". We have lower interest rates and stable inflation, and improving export prices are creating a supportive environment for investment and confidence in the rural sector. When our primary sector does well, this whole country does well.

Question No. 8—Health

8. Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Labour) to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by his statement that "Patient safety is critical to ensure Kiwis have confidence in our healthcare system"?

Hon SIMEON BROWN (Minister of Health): In the context it was made, yes. Patient safety is critical to ensuring Kiwis have confidence in our healthcare system, and that's why we're focusing the system on the needs of patients. Our Government inherited significant wait-lists, which meant that too patients have been left waiting too long for the care they need, facing unacceptable delays. That's why we've brought back health targets to drive accountability, invested a record $16.68 billion across three Budgets, and strengthened our front-line health workforce. These steps are delivering results, but we know there's much more work to do. We're putting patients first, and we won't stop until New Zealanders get the timely, quality care they deserve.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Why is Health New Zealand's answer to nurses' call for safe staffing that they're working towards safe staffing "wherever we can.", and not "always and in all hospitals"?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, the answer to that question is that Health New Zealand is committed to ensuring the safety of its patients and making sure that we are focusing on reducing wait-lists. Under this Government, we've seen a significant increase in resource on the front line, with 2,100 more nurses working at Health New Zealand and over 600 more doctors, and that is about making sure that we are delivering the healthcare that New Zealanders need.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Will he listen to calls from picketing nurses who report that there aren't enough staff to change beds after patients have soiled themselves?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: This Government is focused on delivering the increased resource to the front line. That's why we've invested $16.68 billion additional over three Budgets, that's why we are focusing—there's over 2,100 more nurses working at Health New Zealand today than in 2023 and over 600 more doctors, and our expectation of Health New Zealand is to make sure they're delivering the timely, quality healthcare that all New Zealanders need and deserve.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Does he understand that not having enough nurses to change beds and treat wounds is exactly what leads to the increase in in-hospital infections that I asked him about yesterday?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, what I understand is that when we have a nationwide strike when the union walks off the job, we have thousands of patients not receiving the care that they need—patients who have been waiting far too long. Today, 1,500 patients are missing out on the hip, knee, and cataract operations that they deserve, thousands are missing out on the first specialist appointments they need, people needing diagnostic scans and screening are missing out on the care that they need, and I say to the union: get back to the negotiating table.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Supplementary. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: Just wait a minute—all right.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: When Health New Zealand officials state that a fiscally constrained environment is stopping them from achieving safe staffing, do they actually mean that the Government has underfunded the health system and that patient safety can't be guaranteed?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, this Government is investing record funds into Health New Zealand—$16.68 billion in additional funding into Health New Zealand over three Budgets—but I would also note a quote that I'd like to read, which says, "Given the level of funding provided, it is imperative you remain in financial balance." That was in a letter to Health New Zealand by none other than the Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall.

SPEAKER: Question No. 9—

Cameron Brewer: Thank you, Mr Speaker. My question—

SPEAKER: No, no, I haven't called you yet. Question No. 9, Cameron Brewer.

Question No. 9—Commerce and Consumer Affairs

9. CAMERON BREWER (National—Upper Harbour) to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs: What recent announcement has the Government made about increasing transparency at the checkout?

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs): Well, those pesky surcharges at the checkout will soon be a thing of the past under this Government. This decision has struck a real chord with Kiwis, and I've received overwhelming positive feedback from fellow shoppers who are tired of being stung at the till. It's a simple change that delivers greater transparency at the checkout, and it ensures that people know exactly what they're going to be paying when they make a purchase. On this side of the House, we've heard their frustration and we're doing something about it.

Cameron Brewer: How does this relate to the Commerce Commission's decision a fortnight ago on interchange fees?

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: Well, that's a good, insightful question, because two weeks ago the Commerce Commission announced their decision to cap and reduce interchange fees from December of this year. Now, those are the behind-the-scene charges that are imposed on retailers when customers pay by card. These fees make up about 60 percent of total payment processing costs, and the cap is expected to save businesses around $90 million a year. Now, at the same time, we know that consumers are paying around $65 million a year more than they should in surcharges. Together, these reforms work to tackle both sides of the equation, to lower the cost for businesses and, at the same time, ensuring that those costs, that lower cost, is actually passed on to consumers at the point of sale.

Cameron Brewer: What would the Minister say to those concerned about the impact of this change on small businesses?

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: As I said, it's important to clarify that the surcharging ban is in conjunction with the Commerce Commission's recent decision, and that's a move that will mean a saving of $90 million a year for businesses. Businesses will, of course, still incur fees, but these have been greatly reduced by the Commerce Commission's decision, and they're capped at a rate that is deemed fair and reasonable by the Commission. Now, some businesses may be worried that they need to adjust their prices, but overseas experience—in the United Kingdom and in the European Union, when similar bans have been put in place—indicates that that is not likely to happen. Ultimately, a ban on surcharging is about making sure that the price of goods and services is transparent for everyone.

SPEAKER: They were very long answers; a little bit concise would be good.

Cameron Brewer: Why has a ban on surcharging only been explored now?

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: On this side of the House, we're proud to say that we back Kiwi customers. We know how frustrated they are when they get to the till and they get stung with a surprise—a surcharge on their purchases. In this Government, Kiwis have a pragmatic, reasonable, responsible Government prepared to make decisions of this sort to make people's lives easier, and they're loving it.

Question No. 10—Education

10. Hon WILLOW-JEAN PRIME (Labour) to the Minister of Education: Does she agree with Erica Stanford, who said in 2023 that "we're in a cost of living crisis and everyone is feeling the pinch really, really badly. Teachers are no different than anyone else"; if so, how will a proposed one percent pay increase help secondary teachers with the cost of living crisis?

Hon ERICA STANFORD (Minister of Education): In answer to the first part of the question, that quote was from a breakfast TV political panel in March 2023—extraordinarily tough times that we've not seen in many decades. In this story, inflation was quoted to be running at 7.2 percent; food inflation for the March quarter was 12.1 percent. So, yes, I agree with Erica Stanford on that show, at that time, that we were in a terrible cost of living crisis, which we were subsequently voted in to resolve. Inflation is now within the target band, at 2.7 percent. Interest rates have fallen, and many families are refixing their mortgages and saving up to $740 a month. While there is more to do, our careful economic management has seen results. In response to the second part of the question, I'm not going to comment on an active bargaining process.

Hon Willow-Jean Prime: Why were teachers offered 1 percent but tobacco companies get hundreds of millions?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: As I have already said, I am not at liberty to comment on the bargaining process that is actively under way.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Point of order. Last week, you went into quite a bit of detail, actually, to explain to the House that, whilst Ministers may not have an active role in the operational activity of departments, they are accountable to this House to answer questions about them. Asking questions about a pay offer that has been made, surely the Minister is required to at least address questions about that, not simply say, "I'm not going to talk about it."?

SPEAKER: Well, that might be a better way to put it, but the question itself was asking for a comparison that would be very difficult to make, for any Minister, in the short period of time they get to answer a question. But, for the sake of the House, if the Minister would make it clear why an answer is not being given?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: The answer is not being given because, as I've already said, I'm addressing the question, in that we've already said we're in active bargaining, and I'm not at liberty to make comments while we are in the middle of active bargaining.

Hon Willow-Jean Prime: What does it say about the Government's priorities when board members get an 80 percent pay increase but teachers only get 1 percent?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: My answer is the same as for the previous question.

Hon Willow-Jean Prime: Is 1 percent an effective pay cut when the food prices are up 4.6 percent and electricity has increased 8.4 percent since last year?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: We are still in the middle of active bargaining, and I'm not at liberty to comment on that.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Can I ask the Minister: when someone mistakes the massive reduction in cigarette tobacco taxation and a loss to the Treasury as being hundreds of millions to the tobacco industry, is that someone a total economic illiterate?

SPEAKER: In so much as the Minister can find some responsibility around that question?

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Point of order. That question is, essentially, word for word the same as the one you ruled out earlier, so how come it's allowed to go through now?

SPEAKER: Well, because I asked the Minister to elaborate on the question that you raised with me before. It seems unreasonable if the Minister has made a comment on it once for it to be ruled out a second time, but I did say "in so much as the Minister has some responsibility for the question that is being asked".

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Point of order. That member repeated a previous question, making the same inference, when it's demonstrably untrue, so left out there is the clear belief that something is going on like the tobacco companies are picking up hundreds of millions, but that is utterly false. Ayesha Verrall and now this member is doing it and getting away with it, and that's why I'm raising a point of order, and I think that members are entitled to comment on the kinds of economic pygmy that comes to that conclusion.

SPEAKER: There is also the Standing Orders provisions which mean that, if the member feels another member has misled the House in some way, there is a remedy through that course of action.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Point of order. Thank you very much. In the process of making that point of order, the Rt Hon Winston Peters has, essentially, indicated to the House that he was referring to a member of this House in his question; therefore, it shouldn't be allowed to be answered.

SPEAKER: Well, in the context of this discussion, it would be utterly ridiculous if there wasn't some reference to who the point of discussion was about. The Hon Erica Stanford—

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Point of order. With respect, it should not be allowed for members—in fact, any member of this House—to ask a question that accuses another member of being illiterate in any form and then for that question to be allowed to be answered.

SPEAKER: Just so we're clear, that was actually referenced in a point of order, and points of order—[Interruption] I beg your pardon?

Hon Kieran McAnulty: A question and a point of order.

SPEAKER: Well, I'd have to go back and look at the question. This has gone on so long that I've forgotten exactly who said what here. What we'll do is the Hon Willow-Jean Prime will ask her supplementary.

Hon Willow-Jean Prime: The same one or the next one?

SPEAKER: Well, you can try the same one, but don't be surprised if it gets ruled out.

Hon Willow-Jean Prime: Does she stand by her statement that teachers deserve what this Government has been delivering them; if so, does she believe teachers deserve an effective pay cut?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: As I've already said, I'm not at liberty to talk about bargaining when we're in the middle of it, but what I will do is stand by the statement I made in the House last question time: that, yes, teachers do deserve what this Government has been providing them outside of collective bargaining. I have made sure that we've pumped $750 million into learning support, because that's what they asked us for. We created a new English and maths curriculum that we've fully funded and that we have all the professional learning and development for and all of the resources for. We've flooded 830,000 maths books into classes so that teachers wouldn't have to keep photocopying resources every day of the week. We have been backing this teacher workforce, which is why more of them want to be teachers, because they want to be a part of this.

Hon Willow-Jean Prime: Why should teachers believe this Government is on their side when it cancels pay equity and offers them an effective pay cut?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: I don't think that question is at all in line with the primary question, and I said it in the last answer that I gave, at the last questioning, when I said that the member really needs to not conflate pay equity with collective bargaining.

Question No. 11—Workplace Relations and Safety

11. LAURA McCLURE (ACT) to the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety: What recent announcements has she made on health and safety reform?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety): This week I have announced a range of sector-specific changes that my officials will be engaging industry on. I want to preserve the rural Kiwi way of life and ensure across all industries that the rules are simple, workable, and based on the on-the-ground reality. For construction, I announced that my officials will be consulting on changes to scaffolding rules, streamlining pre-qualifications, and providing better guidance on overlapping duties to improve productivity in the building sector. For agriculture, I've asked WorkSafe to engage farming communities to produce approved codes of practice to clarify the duties for different roles on the farm and for the safe use of farm vehicles. I have also asked my officials to ensure the existing regulations that stop kids working on farms do not prevent common-sense activities. We will be consulting rural communities on these. For manufacturing, I announced that we will be making long-overdue updates to machine guarding regulations—that my officials will be consulting on—so the rules are fit for purpose.

SPEAKER: I just want to make a point. That's a very long answer. You get to give a long answer on the primary question, but your following supplementaries need to be a little more concise.

Laura McClure: Who did you hear from to suggest these changes were needed?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: These changes are a result of feedback I've heard from submissions, my nationwide health and safety roadshow, and suggestions from colleagues. I heard from Rural Women New Zealand, who suggested the rules around kids on farms are uncertain. I want to ensure Kiwi kids can be involved in rural life. I've heard from builders, Scaffolding, Access and Rigging New Zealand (SARNZ), Ports of Auckland, and the forestry sector, that the current scaffolding rules are not fit for purpose. I've heard from a wide range of sectors that the machine guarding rules are out of date. From the meat industry to wood processors, there is widespread agreement that these rules need to reflect reality.

Laura McClure: Why are you making these announcements now?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: There has been high interest in this Government's health and safety changes. We have announced changes to the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 for landownership, small business carve-outs, directors, and the overall focus of the Act on critical risk. I am now announcing major changes to WorkSafe and digging deeper into specific industry concerns. I am letting Kiwis know that the roadshow might be over but the reforms continue, and we are continuing to listen and make these changes with Kiwis who have to work in these situations every day.

Laura McClure: What recent reports has she seen on her changes?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: I have seen wide support for these announcements from Construction Health and Safety New Zealand, which represents the construction sector, welcoming improvements for pre-qualifications; SARNZ, which represents the scaffolding sector, welcoming a review of scaffolding; as well as the Wood Processors and Manufacturers Association, welcoming wood dust and welding fume improvements; as well as Business Canterbury, welcoming manufacturing settings and getting those right for machine guarding. I've heard from Federated Farmers, which represents the agricultural sector, who is welcoming proposals to make farm health and safety more practical and grounded in real-world farming.

Question No. 12—Prime Minister

12. 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: Does he agree with the statement he made during his speech on foreign affairs and trade on 10 April 2025 that "As Prime Minister, I have a responsibility to do everything I can to bolster the existing rules-based international order."?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Yes.

Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: How is he fulfilling his responsibility to uphold the rules-based international order by refusing to impose real sanctions on Israel as Palestinians are starved, slaughtered, and denied medical aid?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I disagree with the characterisation of that question. This is a Government that has recently placed travel bans on two extremist politicians who have been undermining the prospects of a two-State solution. It is a Government that has had four tranches now of travel bans on extremist Israeli settlers. Frankly, the best influencing that we can exert from this part of the world, with limited influence and limited trade, is to make sure that we are consistently and clearly communicating our concerns to Israel.

Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Point of order, please. My question was about real sanctions on Israel as a whole, not on two Ministers.

SPEAKER: Well, it's a bit hard to answer that question without putting some context around why a particular action has or has not been taken. Do you want another supplementary?

Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: What part of the rules-based international order allows for the starvation and slaughter of innocent civilians?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I think, as you've heard, leaders all around the world, including our Minister of Foreign Affairs and myself, have talked to this issue over a number of months now. We want to see unfettered, free and flowing, humanitarian assistance into what is an absolutely appalling catastrophe, and that is what we have been calling for consistently. We are a small country, but we amplify our voice by joining with other countries to call for action in that regard. That's why we have joined a series of ministerial statements over a number of months to make that case.

Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Is it only important to uphold the rules-based international order when it is politically convenient?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: No, and we're not doing that.

Hon Damien O'Connor: Will the Prime Minister consider expelling the Israeli ambassador, given that he represents a country that is starving women and children, that is continuing to carry out actions that more and more international organisations say amount to genocide, because if it was any other country, we would have blocked any diplomatic relations with that country already?

SPEAKER: The Hon Damien O'Connor, thank you for that question. I would point out that it probably transgresses a number of things that have been raised with me by the shadow Leader of the House. That's something you can discuss with him later. Prime Minister, do you have some response?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Look, I've heard the calls to expel the Israeli ambassador, but I just say that, actually, we need to maintain diplomatic channels and communication so we can communicate our differences and our concerns.

Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Why is the Prime Minister advancing electoral reforms that the Attorney-General has warned will breach the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act (NZBORA), disenfranchise over 100,000 people, and will disproportionately harm Māori and Pasifika voters?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, the Attorney-General is fulfilling an independent role to review regulation. We would have received NZBORA section 7 reports, for example, for breath testing and for gang patches. Both those policies have been huge successes. Here, what we're doing is making sure that people have 13 days to get enrolled. That is half the time that the Australians have, and it just represents the fact that New Zealanders are very smart people and will be able to get enrolled in 13 days before an election, rather than 26 like the Australians.

Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Supplementary. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: No, just hold on. Why are people calling out while there is a question about to be answered?

Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Is he aware of reports that, in the past 24 hours, hundreds of Māori voters who have voted on the Māori roll previously have found that they have been removed from the Māori roll or unenrolled completely?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I'm unaware of that. I'm sure the Minister of Justice, Paul Goldsmith, will explore that further. But, again, we want to encourage as many New Zealanders as possible to fully participate in the great gift that we have in this country, which is democracy. I think New Zealand, between now and the next election, has plenty of time to get themselves enrolled 13 days before the election.

Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: If Māori voters are being deregistered at random, without their knowledge, how can he be sure that his electoral reforms will not disenfranchise whānau who have followed all the correct procedures?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Because anyone, Māori or non-Māori, just needs to be registered on the roll 13 days before the election. There's plenty of time for that to happen.

Hon Paul Goldsmith: Can the Prime Minister confirm that 100,000 people are not being disenfranchised by anything that the Government is doing; they are simply being asked to—

SPEAKER: Sorry, wait. There are several people who might be just leaving the House for the balance of the afternoon. Do not interfere or interrupt a question when it's being asked. The Hon Paul Goldsmith, start again.

Hon Paul Goldsmith: To the Prime Minister, can he confirm that 100,000 people are not being disenfranchised by any legislation in this House; they are simply being asked to enrol, which is the legal requirement?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: That is correct. It's not difficult. Get enrolled 13 days before the election. I'm confident that New Zealanders will do that. Australians do it 26 days before the election. New Zealanders can definitely do it.

Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Will he commit to delaying his electoral reforms until after this issue has been resolved, to ensure that he will not disenfranchise hundreds of thousands more Māori and Pasifika voters who have followed all the correct procedures?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, given the answers I've just given to the previous questions, I reject outright the characterisation of that question.

© Scoop Media