2. Social Services Targets—Government MeasuresRt Hon BILL ENGLISH (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime MinisterSocial Services Targets—Government Measures2. Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime Minister: Does her Government intend to retain the Better Public Service Targets to reduce the number of people on a benefit by 25 percent reduce the number of serious crimes being committed by 10000 and reduce the number of children hospitalised for preventable conditions by 25 percent?Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN (Prime Minister): No. We will have our own system for monitoring and reporting on performance against our priorities. Our targets will reflect our different priorities from the previous Government and will look beyond simple measures and in fact to underlying causes.Rt Hon Bill English: Did the Prime Minister consider past success of selected targets that addressed areas of persistent social dysfunction such as reducing welfare dependency reducing reoffending rates for criminals holding the numbers of children affected by child abuse and lifting educational attainment among Māori and Pacific students?Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I think it's fair to say that probably all Governments share an ambition for reducing crime and improving employment. Our point is that we have a set of priorities that get to the root cause of some of the issues that we're seeing in New Zealand. A great example for instance would be our ambition to measure and target directly issues like child poverty. That's getting to the root cause of an issue rather than just some of the symptoms as past Better Public Services (BPS) targets did.Rt Hon Bill English: Why does the Government persist with the view that poverty in New Zealand is purely a function of income when the evidence is overwhelming that low educational achievement family violence long-term welfare dependency and serial criminal offending have a huge impact on persistent deprivation and material hardship?Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Because the evidence points to material hardship as being one of the most consistent drivers of poor outcomes for children. We've never argued that that in and of itself was the only issue that needs to be looked at which is why of course we're also requiring—and will as a Government focus more broadly on—a child well-being strategy for the very reasons that the past Minister points out.Rt Hon Bill English: So can the Prime Minister confirm that the Government is therefore going to abandon a focused approach to social dysfunction caused by the factors that I've referred to and limit its approach to addressing deprivation simply to the measurement of income?Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: No because in fact as the member well knows we've also included material hardship as one of the things that we would like to include and hold ourselves to account on. Our point is that we in fact want to be broader in the accountabilities we hold ourselves to as a Government. The BPS targets that the last Government had were quite narrowly focused. They looked at symptoms rather than root causes and in some cases were manipulated and didn't lead to improved outcomes.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Will it help in the efficacy of future measurements that she discovered family and child poverty before she entered Government not nine years after it?Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The Deputy Prime Minister makes a very good point. We have long held a view based on research and evidence that if we wanted to improve the well-being of children we could not ignore poverty as long as the last Government chose to.Rt Hon Bill English: Has she seen comments by the State Services Commissioner who said that the Better Public Services targets achieved real results: More kids are getting immunised. Fewer kids are being physically abused. Participation in early childhood is on the increase. [And] 40000 fewer working age people are receiving benefits compared with three years ago. That's a whole bunch of things that change lives." and why does she think that achieving those things doesn't change lives and ought to be stopped?Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: This Government has no problem with the issue of targets with priority setting with goals as a way to drive the focus from the Public Service and the Government. Our point is we will have our own. In fact the last Government changed their own targets several times during their time in Government and it will not surprise the member that we have a different set of priorities—a broader set of priorities—than them.Rt Hon Bill English: Can the Prime Minister confirm that the Government's priority is the measurement of income only and the other factors that determine material hardship and deprivation reflected in the targets set by the previous Government are now going to be ignored by the new Government—factors such as persistent—SPEAKER: Order! I think the member—[Interruption] Order! I'll just ask the Leader of the Opposition to shorten his questions up to one or two rather than three or four.Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: No.Rt Hon Bill English: Has the Prime Minister seen the data that show that maternal and baby care are much more likely to be satisfactory when mothers enrol with their lead maternity carer in the first trimester of their pregnancy and has she instructed the Public Service to stop focusing on that measure which was initiated in May last year?Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I am being very consistent in the point here that we need to be much broader in the goals that we set ourselves. I take for example the rheumatic fever Better Public Services target that the last Government set. That did nothing to resolve the long-term driver of rheumatic fever which is cold damp overcrowded housing. In the same way if we want to improve maternal outcomes we have to look at the barriers as to why women aren't enrolling with lead maternity carers and they are complex and often involve deprivation.Rt Hon Bill English: Can the Prime Minister therefore confirm that the target that was set to lift to 90 percent the proportion of women enrolled in the first trimester with their lead maternity carer has now been abandoned and if so why?Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: We have our own set of priorities. They will be replaced and they'll be released in good time.Rt Hon Bill English: So can I take it then the Prime Minister is confirming that target has been abandoned and people working in social and health services are no longer to be trying to enrol women earlier? And if she has abandoned it what other measures has she taken to ensure that those women who weren't enrolled will get better maternal care in the next 12 months?Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The implication that those who work in our health services will no longer be interested in the health and well-being of pregnant women in New Zealand is frankly an insult. Of course they are but we're also saying that this Government's priority is that those mothers also have decent housing that they are free of harm and abuse and that they have decent incomes. We want to get to the root cause of problems not just the short-term issues."