edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Andersen GinnyHon GINNY ANDERSEN (Minister of Police): Thank you Madam Chair. In relation to the points around mental health the member raised—I think he was referring to the Wellington Co-Response Team (CRT) and that is I will say a successful example of a multi-agency response which involves co-located police ambulance and mental health services being jointly deployed to emergency mental health calls. Wellington CRT operates as a face-to-face service for individuals in mental health crisis and as a remote resource provides situation-specific advice to those front-line officers. The CRT evaluation did find that a multi-agency approach did reduce police use of powers to detain people and increase referrals to pathways outside of transport to police custody units or into even emergency departments. There is strong support from police Te Whatu Ora and also Te Aka Whai Ora for the extension of multi-agency responses including elements of the CRT model. So that's important to note.I can't remember exactly what she said but there was a question around reaching 1800. I can comment that in terms of that aim we are on track to deliver by 30 June. Over the last 12 months we've seen some attrition; attrition sits around 4.5 but we're still on target for the end of June. I guess I would add in relation to that that I've been really heartened in the graduations I've seen to date with the increasing levels of diversity that we are seeing come into the police and that it's great to have a police service that reflects the population which they serve. I think police are doing a great job at being able to do that.Back to the member's question around how you cut the numbers in terms of whether there's been an increase or a decrease in terms of ram raids. It's true that they were a somewhat new event. We first saw ram raids occurring about a year or so ago. It was a new event. We hadn't seen those happening in the past. I think it's important to note that they are a complex matter that police alone cannot solve. But saying that police actively investigate every single ram raid and it's been good to see those outcomes happening. I still go back to the point that when we saw those increases happening which was back say from the beginning of 2022 we saw those numbers each month climb up. So from January 52; February 53; March 60; April 77; May 83; June 62; July 77; August 116; and then from that point in August of last year we've continued to see a decrease and those decreases have gone 85 76 72 73 57 40 and then a slight jump from last month up another 10. So I still maintain that the 50 we've seen this month is substantially lower than the peak that we saw in August of 2022.
Mitchell MarkHon MARK MITCHELL (National—Whangaparāoa): I want to make one thing very clear: there's no criticism of our front-line police officers coming from this side of the House. There's only deep admiration and pride for the way that they just keep performing and picking up and having to deal with a 33 percent increase in violent crime a 41 percent increase in victimisations an over 500 percent increase in ram raids a 60 percent increase in mental health call-outs and a massive increase in domestic violence incidents. They are outstanding. And in spite of the fact that even at their parliamentary protest they weren't always supported by the best decisions made from their leadership the leaders on the ground and the police officers out there doing the job made most Kiwis proud of the police service that we have and the front line that we have.I'm glad that the Minister has clarified the fact that she got a bit mixed up and what she meant to say was she wants to make New Zealand safer rather than coming out and saying New Zealanders feel safer. Those are two very different things. The one thing that I would like the Minister to speak to and she still hasn't—she said it's semantics—is that she's pinning her performance on ram raids and whether they're reduced and the rehabilitation around offenders which we all want and we all need. And we've made announcements on this side. Obviously there's a different approach taken on the other side. There has been an increase of 25 percent in ram raids since February this year which was the last data point that the Minister herself has used. When we take the latest police data in March there's been a—I don't know why she thinks it's semantics. It's very clear when you go from 41 to 51 that that's a 25 percent increase whichever way you cut it. How does the Minister explain that when she's been telling the country that we've got 82 percent of these offenders it's a small cohort so we've reduced it to 18 percent? How does she marry that up with the fact that we've had a 25 percent increase in ram raids in the last month? Thank you.
SpeechDr EMILY HENDERSON (Labour—Whangārei): Just following on the topic of call outs you know one of the things that the select committee did hear in the report and we reported back on as we also reported back on the findings of the victim survey is that 80 percent of people are in fact satisfied with police response much as you yourself Minister had said earlier. We heard that demand for police services has always exceeded the ability of police to fund that. And there has been an increased confidence in the police of course and particularly we're seeing that in the increased numbers of family violence reports—police were reporting that they feel that that is a real sign that they have the community's trust. So what I'd like to know from you Minister as you're going forward in this work is: what progress has been made on the Government's promise from 2017 that you touched on earlier—so I'd like more specifics—to deliver the 1800 extra front-line officers if you could Minister?
Doocey MattMATT DOOCEY (National—Waimakariri): Thank you very much Madam Chair. I just want to thank the Minister the Hon Ginny Andersen for her contribution. I slightly disagreed when she said mental health is not in the annual review because of course it was clearly in the Police annual report. I do want to focus on what the Minister said about the Co-Response Teams because the history of the Co-Response Teams—which were announced for $8 million in the last National Government—is that in 2017 this Government came in and cancelled and reprioritised that funding. Here we are five years later and the Co-Response Teams that the Minister referenced in the committee just now are being funded—well the one in Wellington was $700000 of baseline Vote Health funding.So my question to the Minister is: does she think the cancelling of the Co-Response funding in 2018 was a good decision when she now knows that police are reporting 50 percent of their time as non-core business attending mental health call outs? Fifty percent of mental health call outs in New Zealand are unattended by the police. Will she commit funding through the police budget or the proceeds of crime budget to resource the Co-Response Teams so that they don't have to draw funding out of the already stretched previous district health board baseline funding?
SpeechVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour—Upper Harbour): Thank you Madam Chair. I'm just reflecting on some of the other contributions. I know the Ministry of Justice's New Zealand Crime and Victims Survey showed that nearly 80 percent of people believe the police effectively respond to serious crime and that's something that did come out in the discussions that the Justice Committee had and indeed in our report as well but I wonder if the Minister could specifically speak to Operation Tauwhiro and Operation Cobalt and the disrupting effect that they've had in terms of firearms-related crime and dampening down gang activity in particular and perhaps give us an update in that area.
SpeechCHRIS BAILLIE (ACT): Thanks Madam Chair. The last three years Minister of my police career I spent in youth aid and New Zealand has a world-leading youth aid service. However it's not going to work if the other agencies surrounding it don't work themselves—Oranga Tamariki or the mental health issues and all of those other agencies that are involved. Family group conferences get a lot of flak but they work if they're done properly. Are you confident that the other agencies involved in those conferences and the wellbeing of the young offenders are up to it? I know the police are—are you confident that those other agencies are up to it as well?
Mitchell MarkHon MARK MITCHELL (National—Whangaparāoa): So just to confirm Minister are you saying that when you made statements that New Zealanders feel safer that's more you going off your own vibe and what you think rather than actually any evidence or information or stats either contained in a briefing to the incoming Minister or in an annual review to say that Kiwis feel safe? Or is it just the Minister's vibe?
Mitchell Mark; Andersen GinnyHon MARK MITCHELL (National—Whangaparāoa): What evidence does the Minister have as the incoming Minister who has made several public statements—and I'm assuming that she's relying on both the briefing to the incoming Minister and the annual review. I can't find anything in the annual review to support her comments when she says that because the Government has almost delivered 1800 more police officers New Zealanders feel safer. What is she basing those comments on? Hon GINNY ANDERSEN (Minister of Police): I'm really pleased with the fact that we are going to be reaching our target of 1800 extra police. And it is my view that the best way to increase community safety in New Zealand is to make sure our police service is equipped to be able to respond. As I've already noted with ram raids the particular issue at the moment that has been causing concern the ability for police to be resourced and have front line available to be deployed as quickly as possible has resulted in most of the cases I've seen recently in the offender being apprehended sometimes within hours of the offence. I believe the fact that an offender is rapidly apprehended and held to account to be a significant contributor to increasing community safety. The fact that we have additional police to do their work the fact that we have a tactical response model the fact that we've invested in extra abilities for our police to be able to respond rapidly to assess risk and to know how and when to act and to receive that additional training that's delivered now through the tactical response model—I believe all of those factors contribute to being able to respond to crime and safety within our communities and those things increase community safety within New Zealand.
SpeechCHRIS BAILLIE (ACT): Thank you Madam Chair and thank you Minister Andersen. I'm sure you're familiar with Sir Robert Peel the father of modern policing. One of the core ideas was that an effective police department doesn't have high arrest stats; its community has low crime rates. It's great to hear so many extra arrests are going on but I just wonder whether that core idea has been lost a bit. And I wonder—if we combine that with a statement from Chris Cahill president of the Police Association who said All police officers know that the crime the community witnesses is only the tip of the iceberg. I am consistently surprised when a reporter expresses shock at a high profile incident when I know there are many similar events that just don't make it into the media." I just wonder how confident you are with the statistics that you're receiving and whether they're being addressed."
SpeechDr EMILY HENDERSON (Labour—Whangārei): Minister the previous speaker the Hon Mark Mitchell previously referred to the subject of youth crime and the ram raids and I really appreciate your comments on that. One of the interesting points that the Police made to us in the hearings was that they see the best focus for turning our young people away from crime as being to focus on the fundamental causes of offending. I would like to hear from you what initiatives the Government has introduced to get our young offenders back on the right track some who of course have never been on the right track and I would like to hear from you what impact these are having in a bit more detail.I'm really interested also in the Te Pae Oranga panels; I believe there are six and they're up and running and they seem to be having some quite marked impacts on the way in which young people are dropping the recidivism.
Andersen GinnyHon GINNY ANDERSEN (Minister of Police): Thank you very much. Well thank you to the member for that question. Look I do acknowledge that both ram raids and the correlating youth offending has been a significant issue for New Zealand and particularly for retail owners who are directly impacted. My view would be that we did—from looking at the statistics to date—in August of last year we reached a peak of 116 ram raids for one month. And while the member is quite correct that February saw 41 and March is sitting at another 10 over that time I still see that as a decrease from the 116 which peaked in August of last year. Hon Mark Mitchell: Is there not a 25 percent increase?Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: I mean we can debate about the semantics of it. I do think that the measures that have been taken by police—which is through the retail crime prevention scheme and installing security measures—are proving to be a good way of deterring crime.I'd like to note that I'm aware of a recent spate of ram raids in Christchurch. And in two of those instances the security features in one dairy—which was the bollards and the security features at the front of the store—prevented goods from being stolen. And in a different instance—and I know that as far as I'm aware it was a jeweller that had a fog canon installed. I don't think that was part of the Government scheme. However the activation of the fog canon in that recent instance also resulted in there being no goods taken from that store. I'd like to note that there's still significant damage to those businesses which result in insurance claims and ongoing problems for those businesses but I think that the combination of the Ministry for Business Innovation and Employment fog canon scheme and also the retail crime prevention scheme are important to note.I will point out to the member: look I think it's important we have a robust debate about these things. We are actually looking for the financial year that ended in June last year. So debating about the numbers of ram raids that have occurred over the past couple of months—Matt Doocey: Oh sorry I thought that was the chair's role.Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: I'm still happy to answer those questions but if we are actually referring to the select committee report which is 2021 to 2022 the point that he does make even though I've provided an answer is outside the term that we're referring to.
Mitchell MarkHon MARK MITCHELL (National—Whangaparāoa): Thank you Madam Chair. Firstly can I just take the opportunity to congratulate the incoming Minister of Police Ginny Andersen in her new role. It is the fourth police Minister that has come into the role since I've had my role and I hope that it's the last because when you're talking about pressure on police a briefing to incoming Ministers can be exhausting for those that have to put it together and brief a new Minister.I just want to come back to the comments that were just made by the chair of the Justice Committee Vanushi Walters and acknowledge them. We try to work in a bipartisan way on that committee as much as we can. But she talked about ram raids and we've seen a 551 percent increase in ram raids since 2018 through to 2022. We've heard quite a bit of talk recently in the media and from the Minister herself that we're seeing a decline in ram raids. There were two figures that were used. One was in August of 2022 which was at a peak and the next was February of 2023 which was at a low and that was used as an example of percentage reduction in ram raids.But I'd ask the Minister—and I'm sure that she's keeping herself abreast of the Police website in terms of ram raids. In February there were 41 ram raids. We're now in March with the latest data where there's been 51. That's an increase of 25 percent. So can the Minister just stand and square for this committee why she's talking about a reduction in ram raids? Of the offenders 82 percent have been rehabilitated which means that there's only 18 percent out there offending and yet we're seeing ram raids and aggravated robberies appear reported in the media every day and that is only the tip of the iceberg in terms of what our front-line police are having to deal with. So could the Minister explain to me how she's telling the country that there's a reduction in ram raids when it's very clear that there's been a 25 percent increase since February which is the last number that she used through to the end of March which is the latest number that we have?
Annual Review Debate — Immigration
SpeechHon MICHAEL WOOD (Minister of Immigration): In respect of partnership settings firstly I will just correct a comment the member Erica Stanford made about—I think she said a 90 percent decline rate for culturally arranged marriages. I do have the figures with me: the approval rate in the 2021-22 year that we are considering here was in fact 45 percent and that has in fact increased to 63 percent this year. The numbers are higher than they have ever been and I think that is largely because Immigration New Zealand has been doing some quite grassroots work with communities to understand particular cultural practices and to make sure that they are assessing them in a relevant and accurate way.In respect of broader partnership settings the member is right that the Government did say that we wanted to get on to a review of those. That is in the context of a broader review of family and partnership settings. As the member will know there are a number of component parts of family and partnership settings and we're basically going to work through those one at a time. The area that we have determined we will start with is a review of the settings around family violence settings that builds on the work from earlier this year when we extended the family violence setting to those people who are partners of temporary visa holders. I do expect that we will after that then be able to advance on to broader partnership setting issues including that complex area of culturally arranged marriages.In respect of the later part of the member's question about recent declines of people in those situations I have not received any information of that. I'm not aware of any changes of practice or rules that Immigration New Zealand has. It might just be that there are some cases which have arisen that have particular characteristics. I'm happy to talk to Immigration New Zealand and the member about that.Mr McDowall asked about the parent category. We're very pleased that our Government made the decision and has got that category open after it was closed in 2016. That has been welcomed. We are effectively dealing with a big backlog and we are giving precedence to the processing of those first but the first draw for new expressions of interest (EOIs) will take place in July of this year. People who have an old and existing EOI and it might take a bit of time to work through are not disadvantaged. They do still have the ability if they wish to also put an EOI for the new draw in the ballot.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Members our time with the Minister of Immigration has ended.
Stanford EricaERICA STANFORD (National—East Coast Bays): I want to move to partnership. Minister this Government said that they would review partnership with a view to fixing it. Nothing has been done. The culturally arranged marriage visa has around about a 90 percent decline rate. It's not fit for purpose. I want to know whether or not in the last little while the Minister has had a review of the culturally arranged marriage visa with a view of updating it to fit what the actual view of a modern culturally arranged marriage is.The main part of my question is around the living together requirement. We sent nurses offshore during the pandemic to live with their partners for three months in some weird exercise even though they were married and they were in a genuine relationship but just couldn't meet that living together requirement. Is that being reviewed? Has it been reviewed?And my next question is: why is it then in the last little while there have been a whole lot of declines of visitor visas for partners to come here to prove their relationship even though Immigration New Zealand have said We know you're in a genuine and stable relationship we can see that you're married we can see all the evidence you've given us but you can't fulfil the living together requirement but we are now not going to give you a visitor visa to come here to New Zealand to prove that living together requirement."? That has always been the backstop sort of workaround that Immigration New Zealand has done. I'm really concerned now that they're not doing that. Where does that leave partners who can't prove they're living together? Minister this was I think something potentially the Government said at the last election that they would fix. I forget the timing but they certainly said that they would. It doesn't seem to have been fixed and now we're in a situation where partners aren't even able to come in on a visitor visa because they're being declined. I don't know if that's just a lot of anecdotal stuff or there's something going on in the background that's been decided that that's not allowed any more.So I want to know when the review and fixing up of the partnership is going to happen."
SpeechDr JAMES McDOWALL (ACT): Thank you Madam Chair. Just one very quick question on the parent category this time: I just wanted to get the Minister's thoughts and reaction around the fairness of the parent category at present—just referring to the latest circular today that from August 2023 expressions of interest submitted on or after 12 October 2022 will be included alongside those submitted before that date. It's probably fair to say that the backlog won't be worked through at that point in time. So I'm just wondering what he thinks about whether that is fair or not on those who actually submitted those applications a long time ago.
Stanford EricaERICA STANFORD (National—East Coast Bays): Just while we're talking about visitor visas I thought I'll throw in my questions as well. Last year it was reported because of the 40000 backlog in visitor visas that Immigration New Zealand decided—it was a leaked document that showed that they were to have a much more light touch when it comes to risk reducing those risk factors having a quick scan of documents. My question to the Minister is is this instruction still in place? Have we gone back to the old monitoring of risk when it comes to visitors or are we still working under that instruction that came out late last year—that leaked document that said that it will just be a light touch?The second question is has he seen—well the Minister at the time in the media said that he didn't think that our borders would be compromised because of that lowering of the risk factors. And I want to ask the Minister: has he seen any evidence of the fact that our borders have been compromised? If he has what is that evidence and what is the prevalence of it? And just reminding him my first question is is that instruction still in place around reducing the risk factors and having a quick scan of documents.
SpeechDr JAMES McDOWALL (ACT): Thank you Madam Chair. I'll just turn to the topic of visitor visas. It's obviously a good thing that we're at a point where numbers are on the rise but I think we're also seeing the beginnings of a bit of a backlog in the processing of visitor visas. We've long been aware that visitor visas will be ramping up. If we look at numbers still being processed those on hand—you know starting with 775 in January—the latest figure I have was a partial month for April which is almost 8000 so perhaps the beginnings and we've got 182 staff involved in processing visitor visa applications. In March alone there were more than 42000 so roughly about 230 per staff member and we expect that to rise. That's a good thing; we want people to come to New Zealand. However I'd like to just get the focus on the 2023 FIFA Women's World Cup. I'd like to ask the Minister: is he aware that over a third of the teams in the 2023 FIFA Women's World Cup represent non - visa waiver countries? And with 54 work days to go until the start of the competition have would-be visitors many of whom will require national security checks now left it too late to apply as could be interpreted on Immigration New Zealand's website where it suggested the end of April? And further to that how can he be confident that Immigration New Zealand can stay on top of visitor visa applications in the lead up to this event given that from January to March this year there has been as one country example a 176 percent increase in applications from Chinese nationals who will require initial security checks? I'd like an answer from the Minister on that.
Menéndez March RicardoRICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH (Green): Thank you Madam Chair. Just very briefly one of the questions that I asked that wasn't addressed was around the estimates of under-age overstayers and whether the Minister would for example expect deportation of the estimated 100 overstayers aged zero to four or whether he's received any advice or feedback around the welfare of those community members.The other one that I wanted to get some comments on was regarding the Special Ukraine Visa. As I've expressed before obviously our preference is that there are residency pathways but I was also interested as to whether similar schemes have been thought of as part of a response to where there may be conflict elsewhere in the world. We've got conflict in Sudan for example right now and the community is asking for some response. So I'm just interested to understand whether at any point he's sought advice around other conflicts around the world where the community may be needing reunification pathways.
SpeechHon MICHAEL WOOD (Minister of Immigration): The member Erica Stanford has a talent for turning on a dime that is perhaps unparalleled in this House. The unrelenting criticism from that member up until a few weeks ago was that the immigration system was too slow and no amount of reasoned discussion about the things that Immigration New Zealand has to do within its processes would satisfy her and now we have switched entirely and she is asking for exactly the opposite.Now I will address the member's questions. She is right that there is a balance to be struck here. She throws out some individual examples and as I indicated to her at the select committee please forward those on and if those things are happening they will be reviewed. The facts are that at the different stages of the Accredited Employer Work Visa the median time for processing an employer accreditation is seven weekdays; the median time for processing a job check is four days. There may be some particularly good reasons why some take a shorter period of time. There may be some examples of practice that is not as good as it needs to be. Across a large system that will sometimes occur. We need to know about it and deal with it and we will.The member points out examples of fraud and abuse of the system. We do not tolerate that but the member shouldn't be wide-eyed about the fact that since Adam was a boy people try on fraud and abuse of the system with our immigration systems—they always have and regrettably they always will. The purpose of our system is to make sure that doesn't happen. The key thing within the system in addition to the checks that I outlined in my previous answers is that the accreditation system means that when employers are checked if there has been those abuses of the system that occur there there is now a clear mechanism in place that they lose their accreditation which means they lose the ability to be able to employ migrant workers—and they should if they have been abusing the system. That process is under way with a particular focus on some of the higher-risk sectors including franchisee and triangular employers. So we'll work diligently on that—Immigration New Zealand will—to make sure that standards are being upheld.These risks have always been and will always be apparent across our immigration system and others. We have a system set up to put the onus on employers as frankly this side of the House has asked us to do to actually have some trust in employers to work with them but then to hold them accountable if there are breaches.
Menéndez March RicardoRICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH (Green): Thank you Madam Chair. So I just wanted to traverse I guess the use of dawn raids and visits to people's homes as advised by the Speaker to use this debate. So I wanted to get an understanding and comment from the Minister about the proportion of people from Asian countries that are being deported because from the information we received there seems to be—from 2017 figures the majority of overstayers seem to be from the Pacific yet the majority of recent deportations actually are coming from mostly China and India. So I acknowledge that there was an apology for the Dawn Raids that seem to be a targeting of Pasifika communities. But it feels right now if we look at the figures that if we look at the proportion of overstayers and deportations that there is a bit of a sort of greater ratio of people from India and China being deported so I wanted to understand what was behind that ratio. Secondly from figures provided it's estimated there was around 1000 under-age overstayers; around 100 of those are from the ages of zero to four. I guess I wanted to understand whether the Minister had received any advice or whether he's got any comments around the welfare of those overstayers who are under-age and what he thinks the impact that may be to have people who perhaps have no connections to their parents' homelands facing deportation.Moving on to another topic in the few minutes that I have left I wanted to get an understanding of with you know in light of today's announcement on the boosting response to the Ukraine whether he's receiving feedback from the Ukrainian community around the need to have pathways to residency; and with the special policy for Ukrainians yet having devastating conflict elsewhere in the world whether he has considered implementing similar schemes for other countries as well during this time.Finally I wanted to get an understanding as to whether he had at any point actually sought advice around the number of people who may have missed out on the Resident Visa 2021 scheme. Particularly I'm thinking of those who went back to study and who now under the new scheme may face actually many years without potentially having a pathway to residency. So I wanted to get a sense of those people. And actually just while I've still got a few seconds—on the opportunity that he gave to post-study work visa holders to come back to the country I wanted to get a sense of whether the Minister had also considered other types of visas that would have expired during the border closure and to offer those people a chance to come back who may not necessarily have a straightforward path to come back on to other schemes? Thank you.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Members the Minister will come back after dinner. He has 25 more minutes but the time has come for me to leave the Chair for the dinner break. We will resume the committee at 7 p.m.Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7 p.m.
Stanford EricaERICA STANFORD (National—East Coast Bays): Thank you Madam Chair. Minister I know that late last year you were under an extraordinary amount of pressure because we needed workers in the country and the main way to get into the country under a work visa or The Accredited Employer Work Visa wasn't opened until mid-year and then there was a very very slow start to that while businesses become accredited and job checks got under way. At the very start things were very very slow. And I know that you were under an extreme amount of pressure to get things sped up and that seems to have happened but my question to you today is have we gone from the sublime to the ridiculous?I want to ask you firstly a series of questions around the job check. Firstly the first question is what is your understanding Minister of what happens in a job check—what should happen for a job check in terms of Immigration New Zealand and what they do when they receive a job check? And my second question is how are they able to do all of that—what your understanding is—in three hours? Because that is the amount of time that many immigration agents and lawyers are saying that a job check can be approved in. So those two questions to start with. I don't want to give you too many to go on. If you could answer those straight away then I'll carry on with another one. If not I'll keep going. No? All right. Great. It looks like the Minister's going to back up a number. With those job checks Minister I want to read you out an email that I got from an immigration agent who says The labour market tests are they being submitted and uploaded to Immigration New Zealand with job check applications? Is there a requirement to do this?" She said to me "because an example is as to how we are working"—this is the immigration agent—"to a higher standard than Immigration New Zealand for that labour market test we ask our employers to complete a spreadsheet that gives us a breakdown of candidates for the jobs insights into follow-ups as well as reasons why no suitable Kiwis were available for that job. We do this for our integrity of the process but we are never asked to upload it by Immigration New Zealand."So Immigration New Zealand are not uploading data as to how many Kiwis were available to do the job whether or not there were any. They are just taking it on face value that the company is just doing that themselves and that they are checking that there were no Kiwis. It is a very very high-trust model. Is that what the immigration Minister expects? Because what it used to be in the old days is that you would have to prove that there were no Kiwis available to do the job and you had to upload all the details of who applied and why they weren't suitable. Is it the Minister's expectation that that is still happening or does he agree and understand that it's not happening? And if that's the case is he happy that that's not happening?"
Salesa JennyCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Members our time with the Minister of Local Government has come to an end. We now have the Minister of Immigration who is available for 45 minutes to respond to members' questions.ImmigrationIBRAHIM OMER (Labour): Thank you Madam Chair. I'm here as the deputy chairperson of the Education and Workforce Committee in the absence of our chair Camilla Belich who is away on a work trip. I am here to talk about the briefing on the 2021-22 performance and the current operations of Immigration New Zealand. I'd like to start with thanking the staff and clerks who put in endless amounts of hours preparing this report.The Economic Development Science and Innovation Committee conducts an annual review of the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE); however the Education and Workforce Committee is responsible for immigration subject matter. We believe that Immigration New Zealand's work is sufficiently important that it merits specific scrutiny so we initiated this briefing and conducted this briefing as if it were an annual review. We received advice from the Office of the Auditor-General held the hearing and sent the questions for written response. We also heard from the Minister of Immigration himself the Hon Michael Wood; MBIE's chief executive; the Deputy Secretary of Immigration; and the General Manager of Employment Skills and Immigration Policy. The primary focus in the major team of the Minister and MBIE over the period in question is supporting the New Zealand's reconnection with the world after years of border closure and disconnection. We asked the Minister and MBIE about the following: amnesty for overstayers standards of health visa wait times pathways to residency refugee resettlement case review on asylum seekers and the 2022 Special Ukraine Policy.The Minister noted the extension and the opening of visa types and he acknowledged the challenges of transitioning from closed to open borders. One significant challenge seen in the report are wait times. An example: the skilled migrant category wait time is four years and two months on average. MBIE acknowledged that this wait time reflected those applications that have been lodged before the closure in April 2020 due to the pandemic and our closed borders. The Minister also acknowledged that wait times have been a big focus for him and MBIE. More staff and streamlined processes has seen more visas being approved in late 2022 and early 2023 compared with late 2019 and early 2020. Roughly 140000 people have gained residency through the 2021 Resident Visa whereas 30000 to 40000 people gained residency in most of the previous years. The Minister has acknowledged that there are now more pathways for people to gain residency than previously including the reopened skilled migrant category visa and the expanded Green List. Thank you Madam Chair.
Salesa Jenny; Watts Simon; McAnulty KieranCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): We have half a minute left. I call on Simon Watts.SIMON WATTS (National—North Shore): Does the Minister actually acknowledge that there is a problem that central government agencies are offering on like-for-like roles significantly more than what those individuals are receiving in local government and that is creating a significant imbalance within our local government and central government sector?Hon KIERAN McANULTY (Minister of Local Government): This is the third time that I've acknowledged this is an issue facing the sector. I think it's politics at play saying that this is central government because it's the private sector that are attracting these workers as well. The point of the matter is that the councils as a sector can't compete because they're constrained by wages. Central government is competing with the private sector with wages to retain and attract staff. We want to be able to make sure the local government sector can compete on the same playing field.
Annual Review Debate — Local Government
Watts Simon; McAnulty KieranSIMON WATTS (National—North Shore): Look I acknowledge that response. The Minister will be aware as I am that one of the significant drivers of demand for these resources is actually central government. Central government agencies are actually—and this is what councils tell me across the country—poaching local government staff and paying them in some cases 30 or 40 percent more in regards to salaries than what they are receiving through the local government sector.So my question is quite simple. I acknowledge there is a review. But the challenge for our councils and our communities is a challenge that they face today. For many of them they don't have time to be able to wait for a review which may or may not provide recommendations of which the Government then may or may not implement. The challenge exists today and the challenge in part; not all—I acknowledge that not all of that is driven by central government but the feedback that I am getting is that a large portion of it is driven by some of the biggest central government entities based here in Wellington.I'll give you an example. I was talking to some staff in Invercargill. They had lost one of their staff members a technical skillset by a large Government agency here in Wellington; a 30 percent pay rise and the central government agency here in Wellington—very close maybe within a couple of hundred metres of where I'm standing right now so I won't give you any more clues—said guess what you can work from home as well. So you can work from home from Invercargill and we're going to pay you 40 percent more.So what is the Minister doing in regards to correspondence with his colleagues in regards to dealing with what is a real issue impacting our local government sector?Hon KIERAN McANULTY (Minister of Local Government): I acknowledge that this is an issue for the sector but I think that we really need to be careful with our language. Workers are not commodities. They're not being stolen. Workers are making the choice to go to another employer because that employer is offering better wages and conditions.The point is that councils can't compete because they are constrained by rates. It's not that other employers are stealing them because the converse of that argument is that if we constrain wage rises that will solve the problem. That's not the solution. The solution is finding a long-term sustainable funding stream for councils so that they can compete with better wages and better conditions and attract their staff that way rather than trying to constrain higher wages elsewhere.
Watts Simon; McAnulty Kieran; Salesa JennySIMON WATTS (National—North Shore): Thank you very much Minister. I was recently in Westport on the West Coast only last week and I know that the Minister has visited that location. I'm wanting the Minister to outline in terms of any update or progress in regards to providing certainty to that community. As you'll be aware it was over a year ago when significant flooding impacted that part of the world and the implications of that flooding have placed considerable uncertainty on that community. Can you give us any indication in terms of time line of when you believe you are going to be able to provide certainty in regards to that community so that they can move forward in what they do in regards to potential relocation of some of the homes within that flood plain and any other aspects in regards to that?My other question is in regards to the future of local government review. As the Minister will be aware we've seen one report out during the period under review. I'd be interested in what action or anything the Minister foresees will be undertaken in regards to that review. What can we expect in regards to subsequent outcomes from that review and does the Minister have intent in regards to implementing any of the draft recommendations that we've seen to date?Hon KIERAN McANULTY (Minister of Local Government): In regards to Buller I'll just repeat the statements that we've made publicly. This is a matter that's included as part of the Budget process so this is a message that I've shared with local elected representatives in that area ably served by their mayor and their member of Parliament Damien O'Connor. They know that we can't confirm either way until the Budget process finishes and they accept that.In regards to the future of local government review there's no doubt that this review is timely and was actually requested by the sector. Now it's just a matter of timing. So the draft report came out and there was a real emphasis on it being a draft report. They indicated that the final report would be coming out shortly and I understand that it is on track to do so.But then we have a period where there isn't much time between the report coming out and the election. So the Government will acknowledge the report and welcome the feedback from the sector but unless there is something that is straightforward and non-controversial and would have the support of other parties I don't anticipate that anything would be pursued between now and the election.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Before I make the next call I just wanted to let all members in the Chamber know in case you want to ask the Minister of Local Government any questions we have about seven minutes if there is anyone else other than the two members who have been asking most questions.
Watts Simon; Salesa Jenny; McAnulty KieranSIMON WATTS (National—North Shore): Look I acknowledge that Minister in terms of the review under period. But I think it wouldn't be unreasonable for you to be able to articulate in terms of what are your expectations around the expenditure of consultancy spent and whether you deem it appropriate that taxpayer money is being spent on high-priced consultants undertaking tasks which should—could—be undertaken by our public servants and not undertaken by high-priced consultants.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Before the Minister answers I do want to say that the annual review looks backwards at the last financial year. The kinds of questions that you would like more details on is what we will do soon which is the Estimates hearing. But I will hand over to the Minister the Hon Kieran McAnulty for any comments he might like to add.Hon KIERAN McANULTY (Minister of Local Government): Don't want to open up the scope too much Madam Chair I might comment about all sorts of things! Specifically in general I agree of course. Generally speaking where people should be employed with permanent jobs with good conditions and good wages—absolutely; that should always be the preference. But when you're talking about reforms that require specific skills then sometimes you're going to have to rely on the expertise and contributions of consultants. This is not new. The previous National Government did exactly the same thing.
Watts Simon; McAnulty KieranSIMON WATTS (National—North Shore): Thank you very much Minister for clarifying that point. I want to move over to talk about consultancy expenditure with regards to the three waters transition programme. When I questioned you on this in the House before the recess you noted in one of your answers that you had written to the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) about consultant spending. Given the expenditure since would it be fair to say that the DIA Minister has ignored that letter that you have sent to them? Or if not what is your view in regards to that?Can you also outline what is the total year-to-date expenditure on the three waters transition programme and how much of that money or expenditure has been spent on consultants? In regards to the consultancy spend the previous questions that I've asked you were in regards to concerns around the type of consultants that were being paid for by taxpayer money as part of this programme. I want to understand whether you've got any update in regards to how much of that consultancy spend is spent on day-to-day positions. What I mean by that is non-technical positions; roles that could and should by any reasonable person be appointed and recruited within the public sector and not through the use of consultants—executive assistants personal assistants analysts junior roles such as that that should and could be funded by our Public Service which has the capability and competence and are the appropriate ones to undertake that task.I also want to get an understanding in terms of what the costs are or whether the Minister is aware of what the costs are of actually undertaking this reset of the three waters programme.Hon KIERAN McANULTY (Minister of Local Government): Thank you Madam Chair. I've tried to be as forthcoming as possible with the wide range in questions. However when it comes to finances and expenditure in an annual review debate I prepared for the period which the annual review has covered so I don't have those figures. I can give you the figures for the relevant period to this debate 2021-22 and that is total departmental expenditure of $34 million of which $3.3 million were for contractors. But in terms of the other questions I didn't prepare for that because in my view that's out of the scope of the focus of the review.