Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:652;Page:1135] 
Questions to Ministers 
Ministers—Confidence 
1. Hon PHIL GOFF (Leader of the Opposition) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does he have confidence in his Ministers? 
Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) 
: 
 Yes. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Why would the Prime Minister have confidence in a Minister whose behaviour is described by the  
Otago Daily Times 
 as “blatantly partisan scapegoating” and as “having compromised any semblance of the due process”—that Minister being the Minister of Health Tony Ryall—and is the Prime Minister prepared to tolerate such behaviour in a Minister? 
Hon JOHN KEY 
: Yes I have great confidence in the Minister of Health who is prepared to look for accountability when there is a $17 million fraud. While I am at it I congratulate the Minister of Health on ensuring that those New Zealand women who have previously been funded for Herceptin for only 9 weeks now have a 52-week programme. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Does the Prime Minister support and have confidence in Tony Ryall’s efforts to sack Otago District Health Board’s elected chair Richard Thomson on the basis of a fraud initiated before Mr Thomson became chair and when Mr Thomson was in fact responsible for helping catch the crooks; if so why? 
Hon JOHN KEY 
: I understand that the Minister of Health is following a proper process and at this stage no decision has been made. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: If the Minister is following proper process why did the  
Otago Daily Times 
 describe him as “having compromised any semblance of the due process”? Is the Prime Minister confident that Mr Ryall is right in this matter and that Otago’s chief medical officer the senior doctors and staff the entire Otago District Health Board the  
Otago Daily Times 
 and the big majority of the voting public that re-elected Mr Thomson are wrong; if so what evidence does he have for that view? 
Hon JOHN KEY 
: I repeat that the Minister of Health is following due process. I am not responsible for what the  
Otago Daily Times 
 writes although I have noted that in recent times it has written some pretty terrible stuff about the Labour Party. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Is the Prime Minister confident that the approach of the Minister of Health Mr Tony Ryall in arrogantly trying to bully the elected chair of the district health board to resign is consistent with the views of one Mr Tony Ryall MP who earlier said that a well-founded dismissal of another board was “appalling political manipulation”? 
Hon JOHN KEY 
: The Minister of Health is following due process but I repeat again—[ 
Interruption 
] Members opposite might not like it but he is following due process. The members opposite need to realise that when there is a $17 million fraud this Government will stand up and make sure that there is accountability. The Government that Phil Goff was a member of did not do so. 
Recession—Infrastructure Projects 
2.  
CHRIS TREMAIN (National—Napier) 
 to the  
Minister for Infrastructure 
: What steps has the Government recently taken to help address current economic challenges and contribute to driving up New Zealand’s long-term economic competitiveness? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister for Infrastructure) 
: 
 This morning I was pleased to join the Prime Minister and three other Ministers in confirming almost $500 million worth of publicly funded housing transport and education infrastructure projects. This is the first tranche of what will be a number of projects committing funding of up to $5 billion that has been allocated over the next 3 or 4 years. 
Chris Tremain 
: Why were these projects chosen? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: These projects were chosen because they represent quality investments of public money and also because they were among the few projects that were actually ready to go. I was surprised and disappointed to find that most of the announcements made by the previous Government about infrastructure spending related to projects that were unfunded and nowhere near ready to go. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: Has the Minister seen any reports on the comparative size of the stimulus injected by the so-called rolling maul of announcements of which today’s infrastructure package was one; if so can he confirm that although the Australian Government has introduced stimulus initiatives of about 4.5 percent of GDP and the US of about 5.5 percent of GDP this Government’s stimulus initiative in this package makes up less than 1 percent of GDP? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: As the member will know New Zealand has a significant fiscal stimulus—at least in comparison with the Australian and the US Governments—of around 4 percent of GDP over the next couple of years. The difference is that New Zealand went into recession 12 months earlier than those Governments under the previous Government. The 2008 Budget cut taxes increased spending significantly which means that by now when the recession is deepening the New Zealand Government unfortunately has a lot fewer options than those Governments. 
Chris Tremain 
: How will the projects announced this morning benefit the economy? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: The projects will benefit the economy in two ways. First of all they will provide some short-term stimulus; they will soak up some jobs in a sector where jobs are being lost—that is the construction sector. But secondly and probably just as important we need to get this economy ready for recovery. After 10 years of misdirected and complacent policy these projects represent quality investments that will help lift the productivity of the New Zealand economy. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: What is the basis of the Government’s estimate of 2000 jobs to be created by this package and retained over 2 years; and why when Treasury has estimated that at least 68000 New Zealanders will lose their jobs in the next 15 months does he think that that is in any way an adequate response? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: These projects will have the effect of helping to retain some jobs and perhaps creating opportunities for those who have already lost their jobs. We have never said that we will be able to roll back the unemployment that is forecast for this year. The member quoted Australia; at the same time as the Australian Government announced its significant stimulus it also announced that unemployment was likely to reach over 7 percent. This along with other measures the Government has taken will help protect people from the sharp edges of recession and send us along the road of lifting our economic capacity so this economy can grow when this recession is over. 
Chris Tremain 
: What reports has the Minister seen on alternative approaches? 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: Roger Douglas’s latest package? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: Well I have seen that report! Quite a lot of public discussion has been reflected in questions today about the difference between stimulus packages in New Zealand and in Australia. The net result of the 2008 Budget tax cuts to come on 1 April and the Government’s allocations to infrastructure spending mean that the stimulus in the New Zealand economy is comparable to that in Australia and the US. It is just that it has not been announced in such a dramatic way mainly because New Zealand started in recession 12 months ahead of those countries and we had an election around the time of the financial crisis. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: I seek leave to table an article from the  
New Zealand Herald 
 on 19 December 2008 reporting Treasury forecasts of between 68000 and 87000 new unemployed in New Zealand over the next year. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that document being tabled? There is none. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: I seek leave to table a transcript of an article by the New Zealand Press Association on  
One News 
 today reporting the Government’s estimate of only 2000 jobs created by this so-called infrastructure package. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that document being tabled? There is objection to that. 
Hon Sir Roger Douglas 
: Could the Minister explain to the House why given the experience of the last 10 years when the Labour Government reduced productivity in this country from 3 percent to less than 1 percent as a result of its policies of redistribution the Government is planning to spend so much of the $500 million on infrastructure in what can only be described as low-quality low-growth projects? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I compliment the member on his analysis of the misdirected policies of the last 10 years but I disagree with his description of these projects. 
Research and Development Funding and KiwiSaver Reductions—Treasury Advice 
3.  
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: What advice has he received from the Treasury on removing the research and development tax credit removing the $700 million Fast Forward Fund and reducing KiwiSaver contributions? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 Treasury gave us the advice to keep the research and development tax credit to maintain the Fast Forward Fund in the form that had been proposed by the previous Government and to make no changes to KiwiSaver. However prior to the election National had made a number of decisions which were to remove the research and development tax credit remove the Fast Forward Fund and change KiwiSaver contributions and we are sticking to our word. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: Why did the Minister suppress the Treasury briefing that was critical of these moves and release it at a time designed to minimise public awareness? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: The Labour Party complaining about compliance with the Official Information Act is like Jack the Ripper complaining about community violence. 
Craig Foss 
: What other reports has the Minister seen of advice offered by Treasury to finance Ministers? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: The Treasury advice is as always mixed. Some we agree with some we disagree with. Treasury has given us other advice such as the need for extensive review of the Resource Management Act which the Government has followed and a Resource Management Act Amendment Bill will be in Parliament within a few weeks. Treasury has also given us the advice that the performance of the Public Service needs to be improved significantly and I would agree with that. After 10 years of bullying and manipulation it can do a lot better and we will make sure it does. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I raise a question about the relevance of that answer. The question was a patsy question designed to elicit the answer about my reference to an ideological burp and I think the Minister read the wrong answer at that particular point. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is not a particularly helpful point of order I must say. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: Why did the Minister not have fortitude equal to that of the previous Minister of Finance and release the Treasury briefing at the same time as other briefings to incoming Ministers were released? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: The Treasury briefing to the incoming Government has been released. There are absolutely no secrets in it and I am surprised that in the context of the most significant economic recession in 90 years this is what the Labour Party is focused on. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: Did the Minister or any of his staff talk at any point to the Prime Minister or any of his staff about the date of releasing the Treasury briefing? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: The Prime Minister advises me that he read about it in the newspaper. It is unlikely that a matter of that kind of detail would have been discussed at the highest levels of Government. 
Infrastructure Projects—Green-collar Jobs 
4.  
JEANETTE FITZSIMONS (Co-Leader—Green) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: How many jobs will his Government’s infrastructure package create; and of those jobs how many will be green-collar jobs? 
Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) 
: 
 I have seen estimates that the State housing package could retain between 850 and 1050 jobs and that the State highway package could save up to 400 jobs. These figures are very imprecise however not least because the Government does not make individual hiring decisions on infrastructure projects. Regarding the second part of the member’s question I say it is not my practice nor is it the practice of Government departments to classify jobs as being white-collar blue-collar green-collar or any other type of collar—all jobs are important to the Government. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Does he agree with the editorial in the  
New Zealand Herald 
 that he should reinstate the Green Homes Fund insulation programme for low and middle income private homes a programme that is particularly job rich? 
Hon JOHN KEY 
: I agree that improving insulation in New Zealand homes will play an important part for social health and climate change reasons. The member can rest assured that the Government is working on that. I take issue with the fact that somehow the billion-dollar Green Homes Fund was anything other than a fantasy because unfortunately it was unfunded like so many other promises of the previous Government. 
Nicky Wagner 
: Has the Prime Minister seen any reaction to the Government’s infrastructure announcement? 
Hon JOHN KEY 
: Yes I have seen a press release from the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions today saying that: “The investment in schools and housing are exactly what is needed at this time”. I have also seen a very interesting report from Goldman Sachs which said today it was unclear how much of the overall package was new work but that it could see its 2009 forecast for national GDP to contract by 1.4 percent could improve by 0.6 percent. Lastly I have seen a press release from the Leader of the Opposition which states that education funding “might just paint a few classrooms”. Mr Goff might want to read just a little further on after his cornflakes this morning and realise that five brand new schools are about to built and fast-tracked a further seven schools will get funding to replace outdated and rundown buildings 64 schools will receive funding for halls gyms libraries and other buildings and four Upper Hutt schools will get a major upgrade. I know that members out in that area not the least of them being Mr Mallard will be very appreciative that the National Government has finally fixed up the schools in Mr Mallard’s electorate. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: What advice has the Prime Minister received on the number of jobs lost not just through the scrapping of the retrofitting of insulation but also through the biofuels legislation rammed through the House by Gerry Brownlee before Christmas—for example at the Waharoa biofuels facility which has now been mothballed as a result of that legislation? 
Hon JOHN KEY 
: I have not received any advice on the former or the latter except to say the following. Firstly it was all very well for the previous Labour Government to promise things but if there was no money allocated to them then it was not going to go far. Secondly even if one was to believe that the billion-dollar package was real it equates to $60 million a year. Today we announced that by 30 June 2010 this Government with real money will actually be spending $220 million on the improvement of insulation and the improvement of State houses. This Government acts; that Government talked. 
Sue Bradford 
: Does the Prime Minister really believe that building an extra 69 State houses over the next 6 months will met the increasing need especially at the most urgent end of the State housing waiting list and will he commit to accelerating the State house building programme over the full 3 years ahead rather than just the next 6 months? 
Hon JOHN KEY 
: No I do not think anyone could practically believe that 69 extra State houses will fix the entire waiting list. There needs to be a recognition that there is a long waiting list but there also needs to be a recognition that over the last few years the Government that was in place prior to the election totally failed to renovate and keep up to date those houses and this Government is now being forced to fix that up. 
Nikki Kaye 
: Have all the infrastructure projects announced this morning been fully funded? 
Hon JOHN KEY 
: Yes. These projects have been costed and will be charged against Budget allowances. We have made provision for all those projects and they will actually happen. That is completely different from the last Government’s practice of making lofty infrastructure announcements with no idea of and no concern about how they would be funded. 
Dr Russel Norman 
: Can the Prime Minister promise New Zealanders that the process for awarding these and future infrastructure contracts will be absolutely transparent; if so will he ensure that all those who bid for these contracts are required to declare any donations to political parties? 
Hon JOHN KEY 
: I am not aware of the operational process that is undertaken for the administration of such contracts but if in any way shape or form the member is implying that somehow contracts will be issued and the upgrading of these State houses is because National is now the Government then I find that offensive. The reason we are doing this is that we want to improve the State housing stock in New Zealand. 
Metiria Turei 
: Will the Prime Minister match his excellent promise of more schools and school facilities with a commitment for more teachers and support staff—a commitment that would employ far more people per dollar invested than buildings will? 
Hon JOHN KEY 
: I cannot comment on the need for more teachers; I can say that there has been a significant increase in teacher numbers recently. We are now looking to ensure that teaching practices are changed through the administration of things such as National’s literacy and numeracy plans which will make a significant difference to the output of students in New Zealand. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Can the Prime Minister tell the House what the difference is between announcing a programme today that is not funded but will be funded in next year’s Budget and announcing a programme last year to be funded out of the emissions trading scheme which had already been legislated for? 
Hon JOHN KEY 
: When we announced the projects this morning we intended to start paying for them as of tomorrow when people start to work on them as opposed to the announcement of the Greens’ fund which effectively as Dr Cullen pointed out when he asked the patsy question to David Parker last year was all based on whether State-owned enterprises eventually gave some money back. As Mr Parker said at the end of the question without that increased investment—in other words unless the State-owned enterprises put up their money—there was not the slightest prospect of meeting the targets. In other words there was no money. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Did the Prime Minister in deciding to spend more on new roads take into account research quoted in  
The Economist  
that spending on buses and trains creates 19 percent more jobs than the same money spent on new roads or research quoted by the Victoria Transport Policy Institute that each million dollars shifted away from purchasing motor fuel into anything else creates 4½ new jobs per million dollars? 
Hon JOHN KEY 
: When reaching the decisions we reached today and the decisions we will be reaching over the months ahead about further infrastructure investment we take on board the fact that our roading infrastructure has a need for improvement that will help the environment. That is not to say there is not the need for further investment in both rail and public transport. I assure the member that both will get additional funding. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: I seek leave to table the paper  
Smart Transportation Economic Stimulation  
from the Victoria Transport Policy Institute which contains one of the figures I quoted. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that document being tabled? There is none. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: I seek leave to table the 
 Economist 
 article “Be careful what you wish for: spending on infrastructure could easily run amok”. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that document being tabled? There is none. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
Corrections Department—Confidence 
5.  
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) 
 to the  
Minister of Corrections 
: Does she have confidence in the Department of Corrections; if so why? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Corrections) 
: 
 I am confident that the department understands that my expectations are significantly higher than those of the previous Minister of Corrections Phil Goff. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Does the Minister agree with her colleague Simon Power when he said that two escapes in 5 days was “a worry”; if so how would she characterise the six escapes in 7 days that occurred in January and another one that occurred from North Waikato Prison this morning? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: In relation to the escapes the member has referred to two escapes are correctly part of the corrections system; the others were actually escapes not from the corrections system but from the police. If the member would like to put down a question on my other portfolio I would be very happy to give him the answer. 
Melissa Lee 
: What action has the Minister taken so far in the corrections portfolio? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: Quite a lot actually. We have had a very action-packed few months. So far I have visited three prisons including the Auckland Prison (Maximum Security Division). I have spoken to and listened to prison staff and asked for their ideas on what improvements can be made to ensure they can do their jobs better. I have spoken to and listened to the prison unions and sought their ideas on practical ways the Department of Corrections can be improved. I have visited and listened to community probation and psychological services—something the previous Minister never did. I have reintroduced the Corrections Amendment Bill (No 2) which was left to languish by the previous Government. I have asked the Department of Corrections to review the legislation and remove roadblocks to the private management of prisons and I have asked that that be done quickly. I have sought a review of security classifications for prisoners to see whether there is any way that this can be fine-tuned to better protect the public and corrections staff. I have given my support to the construction of prefabricated prison buildings to achieve cost reductions in the vicinity of 25 to 40 percent initially compared with the cost of traditional bed and campus-style cells. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Minister is— 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: There is just so much Mr Speaker. There is just a little bit more. But mostly I have instructed the Department of Corrections to work with Vodafone and Telecom to ensure that cellphone towers built under the previous Government in prison grounds—in Auckland Prison—are relocated as quickly as possible. And by the way I have also asked that double-bunking proceed. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Before I call the honourable member I remind Ministers again that giving answers to questions is not a time for making speeches. It is difficult to hold the Opposition to brief questions if the answers are very very long. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Why is it that it took the Minister 8 days before she publicly responded to the issue of six escapes in a week given the seriousness of the issue—and when she finally did respond she dismissed this as “an operational matter” and then tried to blame the previous Government rather than provide assurances to the affected victims and their families—and apart from engaging in a tiki tour around the country prison to prison what specific action has she taken on prison escapes given that we have had another one from North Waikato this morning? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: Perhaps the member who has just resumed his seat did not listen to the answer. Of the six escapes he is talking about only two are from the corrections system. Frankly not one escape is acceptable and that is why this Minister is going to hold people to account for their actions and inactions. Right now I say to Mr Cosgrove I am holding them to account—which is far more than 9 years of a Labour Government ever did; not one person lost his or her job. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Has the Minister given that she has blamed this on the Minister of Police rather than on the Minister of Corrections talked to her “colleague” about this? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: Of course in National we do not need to do that because I am that same Minister. But I can tell that particular member—unlike the situation under Labour where members had to have a meeting— 
Hon Member 
: What did she say to you? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: She said that the police have been asked right now to find out why they are not restraining prisoners by the same method the Department of Corrections uses and they have been asked to look at the law changes that need to happen to change that. This Minister is not going to sit back for 9 years as that member did and wait for something else to happen like Karl Kuchenbecker being killed. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Is the Minister concerned that the significant improvements within the Department of Corrections which occurred over the last 9 years and which led to an 84 percent reduction—[ 
Interruption 
]—I will say it again for the member at the back—which led to an 84 percent reduction in the number of prison escapes and a 90 percent reduction in the number of serious assaults on prison staff under the previous Government despite the fact there was an increase in the prison population of 3200 is now being compromised; if not as she takes advice from the member beside her why not? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: I can well understand that under the Labour Government people were in fact queuing up to get into prison but I can tell them that under this Minister they might not want to be there. 
David Garrett 
: What if anything is she doing about the incompetence and corruption at the higher levels of the Department of Corrections that was ignored by the previous Government; and by what date can we expect to see some significant action on those problems? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: For a start this Minister has been prepared and will continue to be prepared to listen to staff unions managers and the public and several steps are being considered. But I am not at liberty to further advise the House at this stage. 
Schools—Building Projects 
6.  
ALLAN PEACHEY (National—Tamaki) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: What steps is the Government taking to fast track school building projects? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Education) 
: 
 The Government has announced today that it is bringing forward $216.7 million of spending on education infrastructure. Of this funding $28 million will be an additional capital injection straight away in this financial year and a further $189 million will be used to bring forward school building projects from the middle of this year. 
Allan Peachey 
: What types of school building projects will be fast tracked? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: There are a large number of projects. One example is the bringing forward of the construction of non-teaching spaces in over 60 schools across the country. Another example is a commitment to provide an initial investment of $34 million of information and communications technology infrastructure to schools that are most in need in order to make them ready for the high-speed broadband roll-out. 
Hon Chris Carter 
: How much of today’s school property funding announcement of $216 million is actually new money and how much comes from the extra $3.4 billion that Labour had already allocated to school property? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: I am pleased that the member has asked me that question. Labour never promised money to build a trades academy in South Auckland; we have. Labour never committed an extra $30 million of funding to the Upper Hutt schools that it froze capital funding for; we have. Labour never committed an additional $28 million of funding in this financial year to taking advantage of spare capacity; we have. Labour never committed extra capital funding for special schools and satellite schools; we have. The real school property legacy that we have from Labour is a comment in the pre-election fiscal update that told us that the previous administration under that member had not set aside any funding for the $429 million of capital injection that schools needed over the next 3 years to accommodate roll growth and regional population changes. 
Hon Chris Carter 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I would like to ask for your guidance. Yesterday we had an issue when the Minister of Labour was asked a very simple question and she was asked to give a simple answer and lay it out clearly but she did not. I ask the Minister how much— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I listened carefully to the Minister’s answer. The Minister gave a very full answer to the member’s question. 
Hon Chris Carter 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My question was a simple one; it asked how much of it is new money. The Minister never answered that question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have already ruled on the member’s point of order. 
Chris Hipkins 
: Can she confirm that the $30 million promised to Upper Hutt secondary and intermediate schools today will be additional to the $14.6 million committed by the previous Labour-led Government as the schools were led to believe during the election campaign; if not why not? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: I am delighted to refer the member to National’s 21st Century School Building Programme announced in October last year which made it very clear that there was an additional $30 million to go to the Upper Hutt schools. That is what we have said in all the documentation we have released today. That is considerably more than what the previous Labour Government spent and offered to those schools after freezing capital funding under three education Ministers destroying the hopes of a whole cohort of school pupils in Upper Hutt. 
Hon Chris Carter 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Again the Minister was asked a simple question: does it include the $14 million or not? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will resume his seat. The Minister gave a very clear answer to the question asked and the member will resist making those points of order. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The answer referred to a National Party policy document. You ruled before Christmas that we were not allowed to ask questions about National Party policy documents from before the election. I assume that once a Minister refers to such a document in the House it becomes a current matter and we can ask further questions about it contrary to your previous ruling. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The honourable member has raised a very interesting point of order. It is traditional practice in the House that material the Minister brings into his or her answer can be followed up in further supplementary questions. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I appreciate your advice to the previous point of order bar one point—that is that the Minister’s answer was very clear. It was not very clear. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will resume his seat because he is questioning my ruling. [ 
Interruption 
] The honourable member may just reflect a little on how his behaviour is contributing to good order in the House. I have demonstrated that where clear questions are asked as they were yesterday I will support the member in obtaining clear answers. I believe the Minister gave a clear answer and that is my judgment. The Minister referred in fact to dollar amounts in relation to the previous question by Chris Hipkins. I have made my ruling and the member will not question it. 
Allan Peachey 
: What steps will the Government take as part of this package to put trades training back into schools? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: We committed today to provide $6 million of funding from the middle of this year to allow construction to commence on a trades academy at the Southern Cross Campus in South Auckland. This will be the first of at least five trades academies that this Government will fund to boost trades training opportunities around New Zealand. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Was the additional $30 million for Upper Hutt schools over and above the $14 million previously committed? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: At the end of last year I introduced and passed through the House a bill that allowed me as Minister to set standards in literacy and numeracy. I say to the member that in anyone’s language an “extra” $30 million is an “additional” $30 million. With any normal numeracy skill one would add $14 million and $30 million and get $44 million. 
Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga 
: Which new schools will have their construction brought forward? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: Almost $69 million will be spent on bringing construction of five new schools forward: Mt Wellington Primary School and Hingaia Primary School in Auckland Papamoa East Primary School and Papamoa Secondary School in the Bay of Plenty and Kerikeri Waipapa School in Northland. These five schools are being brought forward by between 1 and 2 years to help provide jobs in these areas. 
Simon Bridges 
: What reports has the Minister received about the state of the schools that are receiving funding in the announcement today? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: I have seen comments from a former member of Parliament stating that particular schools needed a “significant funding boost to help with the backlog of capital works that have been put on hold”. That comment was from the Hon Paul Swain the previous Labour MP for Rimutaka and was in relation to the four Upper Hutt schools that we have announced today will receive an additional $30 million in funding. Under the previous administration three successive Ministers of Education decided they would freeze capital funding for years while they conducted an education super-school Labour Party thought experiment. Our commitment to these schools today recognises that they and their community were done a tremendous wrong by the previous administration. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I seek leave to table the press statement of the Minister of Education which indicates the total spend is $30 million and not $44 million. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that press statement being tabled? There appears to be none. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
Hon Chris Carter 
: I seek leave to table a press statement stating “Education Stimulus Package mostly recycled material”. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that press statement being tabled? There is objection. 
Minimum Wage Increase—Real Income Gain 
7.  
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
 to the  
Minister of Labour 
: What will be the gain in real income per week adjusted for inflation since 1 April 2008 of a full-time worker on the minimum wage as a result of the Government’s decision on the 2009 minimum wage increase? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON (Minister of Labour) 
: 
 It will be $3.78. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Did the Minister consult the Minister of Maori Affairs or the Minister for the Community and Voluntary Sector before she took this issue to Cabinet? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: I am always open to receiving representations from the Government’s supply and confidence partners. I received a letter from the Minister of Maori Affairs. Te Puni Kokiri also made a submission. We took those submissions into consideration when calculating a fair balanced and realistic minimum wage. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: Has the Minister seen any reports regarding the minimum wage? 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: I have seen a report on the recent change in the  
New Zealand Herald 
 which notes that in the present recessionary environment “only the hopelessly optimistic or the ideologically blinkered could object”. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Was her original proposal in which she did not support an increase a result of submissions from either the ministerial summit group to which she was not invited or her former Exclusive Brethren clients who run sweatshops? 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Yesterday you set new very pedantic standards for the answering of a question. Those standards should apply to the asking of a question. I ask you to rule which bit of that question from the Hon Trevor Mallard—a man well known for his abuse of the question process in this House—actually complies with your new standard. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: Firstly you should be taking objection to having been described as having given a pedantic ruling because that is a pejorative term and one not appropriately used by the Leader of the House. Secondly the member simply made factual references. There were no epithets terms of abuse or any of the other terms referred to in the Standing Orders. It referred to the fact that the Exclusive Brethren were formerly clients of the member when she was a practising lawyer. There is no— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member has made his point; he does not need to add to it. The Hon Gerry Brownlee made a perfectly valid point that where questions contain a number of issues the Minister can choose to answer which bit she chooses to answer. I must say we have a bit of a problem emerging where some answers and some questions especially supplementary questions are too long. I applaud members on the structure of the primary questions today. They are good short and to the point but some supplementary questions get too long and some answers get too long. In this case the honourable Minister may answer which part of that question she chooses. 
Hon KATE WILKINSON 
: Can I just refer to my answer to one of the questions yesterday and it is the same answer today: the member is assuming too much. There was significant consultation throughout the process of the minimum wage review and the decision was made based on that consultation and based on the information received. 
Treaty of Waitangi Settlements—Progress 
8.  
Hon TAU HENARE (National) 
 to the  
Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations 
: What progress has recently been made in Treaty settlements? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations) 
: 
 Today the Government signed letters of agreement with three groupings representing eight iwi. Those three groups are the Kurahaupo ki Te Wai Pounamu Tainui Taranaki ki te Tonga and Ngati Toa Rangatira. When finalised the agreements will resolve all outstanding historical claims in the South Island and substantial claims in the lower North Island. They mark a significant milestone in achieving the Government’s objective of justly and durably settling all Treaty grievances by the end of 2014. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: What does the agreement signed today between the Crown and Te Tau Ihu iwi represent? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: The agreements send a strong signal of the Government’s intention to maintain the current momentum in the Treaty settlements area. Te Tau Ihu agreements represent the first comprehensive regional settlements in an area where iwi interests are fully overlapped and highly contested. 
Hekia Parata 
: What leadership has the Crown shown in reaching agreement with Te Tau Ihu iwi today? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: Today’s signing is a clear example of the strong political leadership that the Government is committed to bringing to this important area of work. I want to acknowledge the personal leadership of the Prime Minister and support of the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance in making the agreement possible. I also acknowledge the work of my predecessor the Hon Dr Michael Cullen as Minister of Treaty Negotiations who worked so hard on these settlements. I also want to make a special mention of the active involvement of the Minister of Maori Affairs Dr Pita Sharples who participated personally in talks with respective claimant groups and who made a significant contribution towards making today’s signings possible. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: Has the Minister seen a cartoon on the front page of the  
New Zealand Herald 
 which purports to imply the Government has agreed to allow Ngati Toa to charge royalties for people performing Ka mate! Ka mate!; if so would he care to comment on the veracity of that implied assertion? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: Yes I have seen the cartoon. I regard the cartoon as puerile and inaccurate. The suggestion of Ka mate! Ka mate! dollar! dollar! is highly offensive to Ngati Toa. We are not talking about that kind of redress and as we move forward in Treaty settlements I think it would be very helpful—and the member would understand this because of his experience as Minister with agreements on the East Coast of the North Island—if journalists and I hope I do not sound like Winston Peters would get their facts right. 
Rahui Katene 
: How will settling Treaty claims improve life for Maori; and will improving life for Maori improve life for other New Zealanders? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: Settling Treaty claims will among other things increase economic opportunities for iwi and their members. I am particularly optimistic that the agreements signed today when finalised and legislated for will inject substantial funds into Te Tau Ihu and that is good for iwi and very good for the regions. 
Otago District Health Board—Dismissal of Chair 
9.  
Hon PETE HODGSON (Labour—Dunedin North) 
 to the  
Minister of Health 
: Is he contemplating the dismissal of Otago District Health Board chair Richard Thomson; if so why? 
Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health) 
: 
 Yes; because as chair Mr Thomson is accountable for leading a board that operates both effectively and efficiently. He has been the chair of the board since late 2001 during which time the largest fraud in the history of the New Zealand State services was taking place at the Otago District Health Board. This fraud totalled nearly $17 million of taxpayers’ money. 
Hon Pete Hodgson 
: Does the Minister rank his judgment higher than that of the people of Otago who when very well acquainted with the facts surrounding this fraud judged that the health board members were part of the solution not part of the problem and re-elected every last one of them back to their jobs Mr Thomson included—or is the Minister blessed with some unique wisdom and insight? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: I am not considering removing Mr Thomson from the board as an elected member; it is his position as chair that I am considering. This is a matter of accountability. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: Can the Minister advise what health services could be bought for the people of Otago with $17 million? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: I can advise the member that $17 million would provide a significant number of services in the New Zealand public health service in Dunedin: over 1100 knee replacements or 1200 primary hip replacements or over 8000 cataract operations or nearly 700 coronary bypass operations. 
Hon Pete Hodgson 
: Does the Minister agree with the Otago District Health Board’s Chief Medical Officer Richard Bunton who said that the Minister clearly had Mr Thomson in the “crosshairs of his political point-scoring bazooka” and that Mr Thomson has “the highest integrity and personal standards”; if so might the Minister consider improving his own integrity and personal standards to match those of Mr Thomson? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: A $17 million fraud occurred at the Otago District Health Board over 6 years nearly all of which occurred under Mr Thomson’s chairmanship of the board. It is the largest Public Service fraud in the history of New Zealand. Accountability is a critical role for a chair. 
Hon Pete Hodgson 
: Has it occurred to the Minister that should he sack Mr Thomson as chair then Michael Swann the guy Mr Thomson helped catch will be sitting in his prison cell grinning from ear to ear? And why would that be a good thing? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I alert the Minister to be careful in answering that question because the people involved in that case have not yet been sentenced. So I just urge that care be taken. 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: I am considering the position of chair because accountability is a critical aspect of the role of chair. 
State Highway Projects—Acceleration 
10.  
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
 to the  
Minister of Transport 
: What announcements has the Minister made on accelerating State highway projects? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Transport) 
: 
 This morning the Prime Minister with my humble assistance announced that we will be accelerating $142 million worth of State highway projects. This funding is over and above that available from the National Land Transport Fund and will have an immediate impact on regional economies and their workforce. Further announcements will be made soon in respect of further increasing investment in New Zealand’s State highway network. 
Sandra Goudie 
: What benefits will the Waikato region receive as a result of this morning’s announcements? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: The replacement of the current one-lane Kopu Bridge has been included which means construction can commence in July of this year and be finished a year earlier than would otherwise have occurred. This bridge is a very longstanding source of frustration for people travelling to and from the Coromandel going back many years. Members can expect further announcements on improving our State highway infrastructure in the near future. 
Craig Foss 
: Will any projects be accelerated in the Hawke’s Bay region? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: The Hawke’s Bay will benefit from the acceleration of both the southern link extension of the Hawke’s Bay Expressway and the Matahorua Gorge realignment. These projects are worth a combined $55 million and will provide a significant boost to local contractors and suppliers. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: Can the Minister confirm that 20 percent of the State highways that have been named today are being brought forward by the grand total of 3 months at the enormous cost of zero dollars and is this not symbolic of the half-hearted nature of the transport package he has announced today? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: I can confirm that one of the projects is being brought forward 3 months which does not amount to bringing money across 1 year but it is interesting that with a new Minister and a new Government the New Zealand Transport Agency seems to be able to work quicker than under the old Government. 
Amy Adams 
: What projects in Canterbury were announced for acceleration this morning? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: I am delighted to announce that construction work will finally be able to begin on the Christchurch southern motorway extension. This has been a long time coming. In fact my colleague David Carter wrote to all Christchurch MPs back in June 2004 I believe asking them to support this project. Members can expect further announcements on improving our State highway infrastructure in the near future. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: How can the country have any confidence in the figures used today by the Minister when yesterday he overstated the cost of the Waterview Connection by only $750 million and made a mistake with Transmission Gully costings and can he also confirm to the House that he is meant to be the Associate Minister of Finance? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: The figures I quoted yesterday in regard to the Waterview Connection were those from the business case commissioned by the previous Government. The figures in relation to Transmission Gully were from the announcements made by the previous Government as well. 
Minimum Wage Review—Submission 
11.  
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA (Labour—Ikaroa-Rawhiti) 
 to the  
Minister of Maori Affairs 
: Did he make any submissions to the Minister of Labour on the minimum wage review; if not why not? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES (Minister of Maori Affairs) 
: 
 Tena koe. Tena tatou. Yes I did. 
Hon Parekura Horomia 
: Does the Minister understand that Maori workers will feel short-changed by the $3.78 per week increase and by the fact that the Prime Minister John Key has confirmed that the Maori Party was told of the decision after it was made—hardly a mana-enhancing process? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: I am not sure which part of the question I should answer. 
Hon Members 
: All of it! 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: OK. My submission was for an increase in the basic wage to $15 an hour incrementally—in two steps. Of course I understand the value of the minimum wage. If there is an increase it gives an incentive for Maori to stay in employment. 
Hon Parekura Horomia 
: I therefore suggest and remind that Minister— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I do not think I need to hear the point of order. The member will resume his seat. He should remember that he is no longer a Minister. He does not suggest; he asks questions. 
Hon Parekura Horomia 
: Would the Minister agree with me that the last time the National Party was in Government it took the minimum wage up 86c over 9 years and that the previous Labour Government took the minimum wage up nine times? 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Maori Party is interested in this sort of discussion but I did not actually hear the question. Could you ask the member to repeat the question please? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: If members did not hear it I am prepared to ask the honourable member to repeat it so that all members can hear it. 
Hon Parekura Horomia 
: Does the Minister appreciate that the last time National was in Government it took the minimum wage up by 86c over 9 years and the previous Labour Government took it up nine times— 
Hone Harawira 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. That was not the question that he asked the first time. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will resume his seat. I must say to members that I am very impressed that Hone Harawira could determine that because I could not. It was very difficult for me to hear the first version of the question and therefore it is extraordinarily difficult for me to rule on it. I would ask the Minister if he is prepared to answer the question to please answer it. 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. If you reflect on that question you will find that the Minister has absolutely no responsibility for any matters raised in that sort of question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: In the interests of fairness I am prepared to allow the member to rephrase his question. But I would point out that Ministers have a custodial responsibility for factual information about their departments’ activities that go beyond the current Government’s term but they have no responsibility for policies of another party. In the interests of fairness I am prepared to allow the honourable member the chance to ask his question and— 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I just seek some clarification of that last point. Clearly the Minister has no responsibility for another party’s policies but factual information about what happened under a previous Government is a somewhat different matter I would suggest. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: As I understand the member’s point of order that is correct. Factual information about what transpired under a previous Government is material that the current Minister has custodial information about but he is not responsible for another party’s policies. I invite the honourable member to ask the question. Given the confusion in fairness I think he should have a chance to ask his question. 
Hon Parekura Horomia 
: Does the Minister agree that the previous National Government took the minimum wage up by 86c over a period of 9 long years and that the previous Labour Government took it up nine times and is the Minister prepared to say what effect that will have on Maori workers? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member has asked for information going back a couple of Governments ago. I do not think he can expect the current Minister to have that information at his fingertips. It goes back beyond the 9 years of the previous Labour Government as I understood the member’s question. I do not see how he can expect the current Minister to have information going back as far as that. In the interests of fairness to the member I will give him one more chance to ask a question but I make it clear— 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am happy to answer the question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: If the Minister feels comfortable answering the question I will allow him to do so. 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: My answer is no and no. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Do we take from that answer that the Minister made a submission on the minimum wage in complete ignorance of— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member knows as one who is most knowledgable about the Standing Orders that that is not a point of order and it is not appreciated when he raises that kind of point of order. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: Tena koe Mr Speaker. Kia ora tatou. Is the Minister concerned that after 9 years of a Labour Government the Maori unemployment rate which is 9.6 percent is over twice as high as the general unemployment rate? How does he think lifting the minimum wage will change this? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: Yes I am concerned and our commitment is to lift the minimum wage and to ensure that there is sufficient incentive for Maori to stay in the Labour market and not to opt out. 
Hon Parekura Horomia 
: Does the Minister agree that when the previous Labour Government came in the unemployment rate was running generally at 21.2 percent and that the previous Labour Government brought unemployment down to 4 percent for the mainstream and 7 percent for Maori and also kept Maori in the workforce a lot more than any other people? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I stress that that question is getting a fair way away from the primary question. 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: Unfortunately it still is a high rate for under-24-year-olds at this time—18 percent. 
Hone Harawira 
: Tena koe Mr Speaker. Why did you make a submission to the Minister of Labour to advocate for lifting the minimum wage to $15 an hour? 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Although I am sure you do lots of things I doubt very much that you made a submission to the Minister of Labour. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I appreciate the honourable member’s concern but interrupting a question is— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Mr Speaker you made it clear last year as a result of a submission by the Hon Bill English that you would be strict about this matter. I think it applies to Government members and their—what are they called-supporters as well as to Labour members. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I accept the member’s point. I invite the honourable member to state his question again so that the Minister can hear it afresh. 
Hone Harawira 
: My apologies Mr Speaker. Why did the Minister of Maori Affairs make a submission to the Minister of Labour to advocate lifting the minimum wage to $15 an hour? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: Because it is my role as Minister of Maori Affairs to advocate Maori aspirations for an optimal quality of life. 
Housing New Zealand Corporation—Increased Funding 
12.  
JO GOODHEW (National—Rangitata) 
 to the  
Minister of Housing 
: What benefits will the extra $124.5 million of investment announced today for the Housing New Zealand Corporation provide to the people of New Zealand? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY (Minister of Housing) 
: 
 The initiative is a double win. First of all we can address the disgraceful legacy left by the previous Government. Its inaction on upgrading State houses meant that Labour was a slum landlord. Secondly skilled tradespeople in New Zealand and the men and women who support those tradespeople will continue to be in jobs for the next 12 to 18 months. 
Jo Goodhew 
: What actions has the Minister taken to ensure that the $124.5 million of increased funding announced today for the Housing New Zealand Corporation will help deliver economic stimulus as soon as possible? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: Since the approval of the stimulus package by Cabinet I have been working with my officials to ensure that upon the announcement we can proceed pretty quickly. The package achieves three goals: first it addresses the need to improve the living conditions of State house tenants due to the previous Government’s neglect in that area; secondly it gives the ability to start as soon as possible particularly with the upgrades because many of those will not require consents; and thirdly this work will stimulate local economies right around New Zealand. I understand from my officials that it will take approximately 4 to 6 weeks to award upgrade contracts to get the work under way as soon as possible. 
Question No. 4 to Minister 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. In answer to a supplementary question to question No. 4 the Prime Minister indicated that a particular school project in Hutt South my electorate had been brought forward. I have examined the list and it is clear that that is not the case. It was in Rimutaka in Upper Hutt and I invite the Minister of Education to brief the Prime Minister so he can correct the reply. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The honourable member knows that that is not a point of order. He may believe there is something wrong with an answer given but it is not a matter of a point of order if he believes that an answer has been given in error. There are other channels for following that up.