Robertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 14 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:9841. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]3.GRANT ROBERTSON (Deputy Leader—Labour)to the Minister for Tertiary Education Skills and Employment: Has he been advised whether the Prime Minister stands by his statement about Budget 2011 that “This is a Budget that will see 170000 new jobs created”; if so according to the Treasury in that Budget what progress should have been made by March 2013 towards reaching that target?Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Tertiary Education Skills and Employment):Firstly I would say that if I were the Opposition I would not necessarily pick today to ask that sort of question when it has opposed yet again—Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! Would the Minister just answer the question. [Interruption] Order! I have called the Hon Steven Joyce to answer the question.Hon STEVEN JOYCE: A little bit tetchy maybe. I would provide the usual caveat around Treasury forecasts: they are no more or less than the best predictions available at the time they are made and of course suggesting it gets it right quarter by quarter—as the member suggests it is doing—is actually particularly fraught. Having said all of that Budget 2011 projected job growth by March 2013 of 99000. We have had 70000 more people employed than 3 years ago according to the latest version of the household labour force survey which had unemployment down to 6.2 percent. So we do still have a way to go to meet our 4-year target but it is nothing that a convention centre some more aquaculture a new mine down on the West Coast some more investment in innovation more oil and gas exploration—Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! I apologise to the member. I have a point of order from Grant Robertson.Grant Robertson: There were two parts to this question. The Minister addressed part of the second part. He did not address the first part which was whether he had been advised—[Interruption] Is this a point or order or not?Mr SPEAKER: It is a point of order. [Interruption] Order! It is a point of order and the point of order will be heard in silence.Grant Robertson: The first part of the question asked whether he had been advised whether the Prime Minister stood by his statement that “This is a Budget that will see 170000 new jobs created”. He has not addressed that part of the question.Mr SPEAKER: From my recollection of the answer I think that is absolutely true. I do not believe the Minister has addressed the first part of that question.Hon Annette King: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. On two occasions you called “Point of order” and the Minister continued with his answer and took absolutely no notice of you calling “Point of order”. I think you need to ensure that he follows the Standing Orders.Mr SPEAKER: I thank the member for her comments. Would the Minister please now address the first part of the substantive question.Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Well I am sorry I intended to answer the first part of the question by saying: subject to the usual caveats around Treasury predictions and quarter-to-quarter variations yes the Government does stand by its—Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It was not a question about whether the Government stands by the statements; it was a question about whether the Minister has received advice from the Prime Minister. That is what the question is. It has nothing to do with the Government.Mr SPEAKER: I think in the normal course of—[Interruption] Order! In the normal course of events there is collective responsibility and therefore the Prime Minister Cabinet any of the Ministers speak as one but on this occasion when the Prime Minister is specifically listed in the primary question it would be helpful if the Minister would actually address that.Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. We are getting incredibly pedantic around this stuff. The Minister has answered twice now and he has answered the question. The question does ask whether he has been advised whether the Prime Minister stands by his statement. His answer was given the usual caveats around Treasury forecasting yes. It cannot be clearer than that.Mr SPEAKER: No I do not believe that is the case. I will certainly look back in Hansard but the easiest thing to move this matter forward is for the Minster to please address the first part with regard to the reference to the Prime Minister.Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Well I am not sure which part you are asking me to address except to say that my understanding is that yes the Government the Prime Minister the Minister of Finance I and other Ministers do stand by that target.Grant Robertson: Will he recommit today to meet the promise of 170000 new jobs being created by 2015?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Well you are making us give exact answers; I would have thought that the supplementary questions would then take account of the answers.Mr SPEAKER: Order! Would the Minister just answer the question that has been asked? [Interruption]Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Well actually it is fair but nevertheless the Government has not changed its commitment and is working hard to achieve it as opposed to the Opposition which seems to oppose every single initiative the Government takes to increase jobs in this country.Grant Robertson: How will it be possible for the Minister and the Government to meet their target when there were only 8000 jobs created in the last year when projections were that 57000 jobs were required to be created in order to meet the promise he has just recommitted to?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Well my understanding is that around 54000 new jobs were created according to the quarterly employment survey of the last 2 years. But to answer the member’s questions more generally the Government is focused on a huge range of things to increase investment in jobs and growth in this economy. One example from just the last couple of days is the convention centre in Auckland which the Labour Party and the Green Party have yet again opposed—yet another initiative. I say again if I were them I would not have picked today to ask that question.Grant Robertson: Why would he try to dispute that he is more than 40000 jobs behind meeting his promise when the data comes from the household labour force survey which he has described as the standard internationally recognised measure of employment and the Prime Minister has called the most rigorous form of measuring employment in the country; why will he not just admit that he is 40000 jobs behind his promise?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Well the reality is we are growing jobs. I have been quite open that we are not growing them yet as an economy as fast as we would wish but the Government is focused hugely on growing jobs. Let me give you a few examples of that to make the member feel happier about the efforts that we are—Rt Hon Winston Peters: Point of order.Hon STEVEN JOYCE: —putting in: one—Rt Hon Winston Peters: Point of order.Hon STEVEN JOYCE: —in terms of the increased oil and gas—Rt Hon Winston Peters: Mr Speaker.Hon STEVEN JOYCE: —exploration which the Opposition opposes; two—Mr SPEAKER: Order! I apologise to the Minister. I have a point of order from the Rt Hon Winston Peters.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Forget about apologising to him I am the one who is asking for the point of order.Mr SPEAKER: And I am giving the member—Rt Hon Winston Peters: Well great—get it right. My point of order—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member has a right to raise a point of order. As soon as I saw the member on his feet I called that point of order.Rt Hon Winston Peters: And Mr Speaker I expect you to pay more attention when people raise points of order. I should not—Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! It is that sort of interchange that leads to disorder and leaves me with little choice but to discipline the member. Would the member please raise his point of order without criticism—Rt Hon Winston Peters: My point of order raised is very clear. The Minister was asked a specific question as to how he would reconcile the data not to give a long-winded speech about how he cannot and you let him go on and on and on. When a specific question was asked by Mr Robertson he could not answer it refused to answer it and you did not stop him. Then when I raised a point of order you did not recognise me—you let him carry on. That is what leads to disorder in this House.Mr SPEAKER: Can I invite the member to have a look at the specificity of the question that was raised—Rt Hon Winston Peters: I did.Mr SPEAKER: Well I invite the member to have another look at it. I think the Minister was very adequately addressing that question.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The member asked about the household labour force survey described by two senior Ministers as the most rigorous analysis of employment or unemployment in this country and why he could not reconcile the fact that there were 40000 jobs short. If he—Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! That is quite enough. That is why I invited the member to have a look at the question again because it talked about why the Minister continues to dispute the figures and that is how the question started. Has the Minister finished his answer to the question? He has.Grant Robertson: Can he confirm that unemployment is still above the worst-case scenario that was projected in last year’s Budget?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: No I cannot do that for the member today but what I can confirm is that it is the 11th lowest right across the OECD. Nobody is arguing that there is not more work to do and that is why this Government is out every day working on initiatives to increase growth. What is the Opposition doing?Grant Robertson: For the benefit of the Minister I seek leave to table the section of last year’s Budget that shows that the worst-case scenario—Mr SPEAKER: No. [Interruption] Order! Budget documents are well and truly available to every member in this House.