6. Question No. 6—Social Development and EmploymentCHRIS BISHOP (National) to the Associate Minister for Social Development and EmploymentQuestion No. 6—Social Development and Employment6. CHRIS BISHOP (National) to the Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment: What is the total amount spent from the December 2017 quarter onwards on Emergency Housing Special Needs Grants to date and is she satisfied with the Government's performance on housing?Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment): I'm advised that since the beginning of the December 2017 quarter the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) has granted 628659 Emergency Housing Special Needs Grants valued at just over $1.4 billion in support of the immediate housing needs of individuals and whānau. Over the year to June 2023 the number of households accessing the Emergency Housing Special Needs Grants declined; there were 780 fewer households staying in emergency housing at the end of June 2023 compared to June 2022. In addition we've also seen a decline in applications on the public housing register; there's been a reduction of 2961 applications between the period of April 2022 and June 2023. We've been investing both in preventing people from entering the emergency housing system with our housing support products and increased support for those who require emergency housing. Initial evaluations clearly demonstrate the investment in support services housing brokers ready-to-rent programmes and intensive case management including working with MSD employment teams are seeing better outcomes for those in emergency housing. In addition the fantabulous work of our housing Minister has meant that we've seen the biggest public housing build programme since the 1970s. We've delivered already over 12000 public homes in the time that we've been in office; in fact to put things in perspective of the public homes in New Zealand today one in seven has been added in the last five years. This is a significant achievement when you consider that the first State home was built back in 1937.Chris Bishop: Why has the Government spent just $600000 on the reset of the emergency housing system when $355 million was allocated in Budget 2022 when there are nearly 6000 families living in motels and 480 are living in cars?Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: What our Government has invested in and as I touched upon in my primary answer is a whole suite of support services that people can access prior to entering the emergency housing system and while they're in emergency housing as well. Things like intensive case management—for example those who need support services; housing support products so that people can stay in housing or be diverted into private rentals and not enter the emergency housing system. I could go on but those are the investments that our Government has made.Chris Bishop: Point of order Mr Speaker. My question was about the reset of the emergency housing system and money allocated in Budget 2022 and how much money has been spent to date.SPEAKER: Can you remind me of the question?Chris Bishop: The question was Why has the Government spent just $600000 on the reset of the emergency housing system when $355 million was allocated in Budget 2022?"SPEAKER: Not quite there but it wouldn't take much to join those dots together to address it. Do you want to have another go?Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: Sure. The additional investment is as I mentioned—the whole point of the reset is partly to prevent people from getting into the emergency housing system. It's to ensure that support that is provided to those in emergency housing can be accessed in a way that's relevant to them as well.Chris Bishop: Does she recall the Minister of Housing saying in 2021 "What we don't have is people living in cars and on the streets" and how does she reconcile that with her own data showing 480 people applied for the housing register while living in cars last quarter?Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: Actually this is a point that I addressed in great detail last week in the House because the numbers that the member's referring to don't actually frame the issue well at all. As I mentioned previously it's a cumulative figure—Chris Bishop: It's your own data!Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: Yes sure it is MSD data but it's a cumulative figure—it is a figure that increases over time because people only come off the list if they get into public housing. Ultimately the only way that we can get out of the housing crisis that we inherited from that side of the House is by building public housing and that's what we are doing. We have delivered 12198 public homes on this side of the House so that question about people living in cars is a bit rich from that side of the House. Chris Bishop: Why did the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development (MHUD) reject the Wellington Homeless Women's Trust application for four new beds recently—four—because of a new policy that says MHUD will not fund transitional housing beds in places that have communal facilities?Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN: I don't have ministerial responsibility for that. Chris Bishop: Point of order. That's not correct. She's the Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment; she's responsible for emergency housing. Hon Priyanca Radhakrishnan: Yes not transitional housing or special needs grants.Chris Bishop: OK nice—that's you dodging it. We put it down to her—SPEAKER: Order! Oh be quiet Mr Bishop for goodness' sake. Everyone be quiet. Thank you. Now I've forgotten what the point of order was. Oh that's right; it's up to the Minister to know what her responsibilities are. If she says that they're not then we'll take it as being correct unless further questions will illuminate some other answer.Nicola Willis: Point of order Mr Speaker. I wonder if in this case it would be helpful for the Minister to—SPEAKER: No I don't think so—no no no sit down. No I've made a ruling—OK?—and you're not going to question it. Hon Gerry Brownlee: Point of order Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker why was the primary question accepted if the delegations are incorrect?SPEAKER: Well clearly it was accepted because that was part of the Minister's responsibility. What the Minister said—and we're re-litigating both what was said and my ruling on it—was that she wasn't responsible for what the supplementary was being asked."