2. Question No. 2—Social Development and EmploymentHon MARAMA DAVIDSON (Co-Leader—Green) to the Minister for Social Development and EmploymentQuestion No. 2—Social Development and Employment2. Hon MARAMA DAVIDSON (Co-Leader—Green) to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Does she accept the statement in the Salvation Army's State of the Nation 2024 report that says that in 2023 for households relying on welfare benefits income levels continue to fall significantly short of what is needed for some level of participation in society"?Hon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance): on behalf of the Minister for Social Development and Employment: The answer is no; however I do agree with the statement in the Salvation Army report that says "We have a new government that cannot take credit for the positive developments outlined in this report or be blamed for the disturbing developments that have taken place over the last one to three years."Hon Marama Davidson: How can the Government justify generating savings by reducing benefit increases for people already living below the poverty line to pay for tax cuts for the rich?Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Well the member may be concerned that she was aligned with a Government that was responsible for delivering some of these outcomes that are also reported in the Salvation Army report: the proportion of children reporting some level of food insecurity rose sharply in 2023 including 40 percent of Pacific households with children and the number of children in benefit-dependent households increased during 2023 meaning more children are at risk of poverty.Ricardo Menéndez March: Point of order. Before addressing that question that answer clearly came with a political attack in relation to the member's alignment with the previous Government and you had just ruled about the need to start the answers by addressing the questions rather than with political attacks.SPEAKER: Well I heard from my left that it wasn't a political question. I think essentially it was. All questions by their nature are political but the question is: what is the intention of it? I didn't think that the response from the Hon Nicola Willis was particularly pernicious. It was a question about reflection.Ricardo Menéndez March: Does she stand by her statement that "It's challenging to live on a benefit at any rate" and if so why did she decide to deliberately make it more challenging by lowering increases to benefits?Hon NICOLA WILLIS: I stand by my statements.Hon Kieran McAnulty: Point of order. I'm seeking some clarification from your ruling just now in that all questions by nature are political. Speakers' rulings are quite clear that it makes the distinction between a general question and one that is political in nature and if a member asks a question that's political in nature they can expect a political answer. The converse of that is if they ask a straight question they should expect a straight answer. I'm concerned that your response goes counter to that so could you please clarify.SPEAKER: No I don't think it does. I think it just in many ways clarifies the degree of thinking insomuch as we're all elected because of the political system then anything we do in here has a political nature. But look I'll take it under advisement as I have done on other occasions and reflect further on your submission.Ricardo Menéndez March: Does she agree with the statement from the Minister of Finance that "What I'm conscious of and what I want New Zealanders to appreciate is that when our economy is deteriorating in the way that it has been that comes with pretty profound human impacts in terms of unemployment." and if so why is she choosing to punish people experiencing unemployment?Hon NICOLA WILLIS: I think the Minister of Finance put that very well and that is actually why this Government is so determined that for those who can work we want to support them into work because that is what lifts their incomes in the long term. We think it is shameful that under a time of declining employment 69000 more people went on to the jobseeker benefit under Labour with 50000 more children living in benefit-dependent households. That is no way out of poverty.Kahurangi Carter: Supplementary.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Supplementary question.SPEAKER: She beat you by some seconds—I know that's unusual. It's not something I could do.Kahurangi Carter: Thank you. Is she concerned by advice from officials that indexing benefits to inflation rather than wage growth will result in bigger reductions to increases of the supported living payment than to the jobseeker benefit?Hon NICOLA WILLIS: On behalf of the Minister what I am pleased to see is that we have a Government that is taking action to support incomes and address the cost of living across the board. That includes policies such as the Family Boost policy to provide childcare rebates to families with children in childcare and policies to remove the Auckland regional fuel tax to stop petrol tax increases and to ensure the economy is better managed so that there are more opportunities for New Zealanders in all circumstances.Hon James Shaw: Point of order. I know that we are straying into territory that we've visited in the not too distant past but the question was quite specific around advice that the Minister had received from officials in relation to a specific Government policy. Now the Minister referred to a number of other policies but not to the one that was asked. I know that we've had a conversation saying you know that the question was addressed. But in the past such as under Speaker Carter if a question was narrow then it was fair to expect a response that was relating specifically to the question that was asked. If a question was broader and more political you could expect a broader and more political response. But if we find ourselves in a situation where members are trying to ask specific questions that are quite narrow in nature in order to elicit a response and all we get is a general answer that talks about the topic that the question happens to be related to it somewhat obviates the need for question time at all.SPEAKER: That's very reasonably put. Would the Minister like to expand on the answer given previously.Hon NICOLA WILLIS: On behalf of the Minister I am simply not aware of the detail of the advice to which the member refers.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Could I ask the Minister whether she is concerned with respect to the Salvation Army's State of the Nation report and its concerns about poverty outlined in that report at how it was the fact that 128000 immigrants came to New Zealand in the year ended October last year exacerbating all the conditions that this Government now has to deal with?Hon NICOLA WILLIS: On behalf of the Minister the Deputy Prime Minister makes a very good point. I recently sat down with the Minister of Immigration and looked at what has happened with immigration in recent years and what we saw was that despite the rhetoric about highly skilled migrants being targeted what instead we saw under the last Government's immigration settings was a significant spike in lowly skilled workers at the expense of highly skilled workers.Kahurangi Carter: How does this change support her focus on "getting people who can work into work" when officials have advised that "Beneficiaries that are not able to work will also be impacted by this change but will have no ability to enter work to change their situation."?Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Well the member is correct that different groups of beneficiaries are affected in different ways and some beneficiaries have more options to seek employment than others. It is important that we take steps across all of our policy settings to support New Zealanders including for example ensuring that when they need to access the health system they can do so ensuring that their children attend schools where they get taught the basics of reading writing and maths and ensuring they live in safer communities and aren't victimised by violent crime at the rates they were under the last Government.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Has the finance Minister received any reports requested by the last Government and members of that Government into the effects of 128000 people coming here in one year flat and what it would mean for housing health access to infrastructure and dare I say it law and order in this country? Has she received any reports of their requests back then rather than the faux concern they're showing now?Hon Grant Robertson: Point of order. Several points but the biggest is that the question is not to the Minister of Finance.SPEAKER: Sorry?Hon Grant Robertson: It's not to the Minister of Finance. The question is out of order. Those were the very first words that the questioner said: "To the Minister of Finance".SPEAKER: Well because I'm very fair would the Rt Hon Winston Peters like to address the first part of his question to the appropriate Minister?Rt Hon Winston Peters: Has the Minister received any reports of requests by the previous Government of their officials as to the unheralded impact of 128000 a record number coming to New Zealand in just one year and its impact on housing availability educational facility availability infrastructure and health? Were there any reports requested back then by these people now today showing faux concern in the House?Ricardo Menéndez March: Point of order. The issues the Hon Winston Peters raised are not related to any responsibilities that the Minister for Social Development and Employment has.SPEAKER: When he opens the questions with "Has she seen any reports of" it's in order. Any further questions on this? OK then we move now to question No. 3 in the name of Nancy Lu."