edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
SpeechDr EMILY HENDERSON (Labour—Whangārei): Kia ora Mr Speaker. Well what a night of revelations. The National Party and it appears also the ACT Party are grappling with the realisation that the pandemic is not in fact over and therefore we still need to give the court the support they need to continue to innovate and do the vital job of giving access to justice and producing justice. It is not over. We need to give the court the power. Why are we doing it now? Because one does not jump in to tell the courts how to run their own business. That is something that I think would assist my colleague from ACT who has just spoken.The problem here is one of constitutional separation of powers. Our legislative Chamber should very very seldom interfere with the operation of a court and the way in which a judge wants to run their own court. These are fundamental things that go back all the way to times like the Star Chamber and ship-money and the English Civil War. We do not rush in where angels fear to tread. And that is also I think the reason that we have taken this long.We needed the judges to tell us that they needed the support. But having said that what that also gives us is the support to know that this is going to be OK because unlike my friend on ACT's benches I am aware that when we say that judges will run things according to the interests of natural justice and that they will do things that are reasonably necessary to ensure the interests of justice and to ensure access that doesn't come out of nowhere. That comes from 400 or 500 years of legal tradition as to what those things need. We are giving the courts the backing to know that they can continue to innovate when they need to without fear of appeal or repeal.In answer to my friend Mr Penk I am so looking forward to the innovative forward-thinking National Party members who are going to support the continuing good things that we are going to want to do to ensure access to justice in the future. Although having dealt with three National Ministers of Justice when I was trying to get those things done including audiovisual links and not having made any difference until we had Andrew Little and that lady over there on the Green benches [Member indicates to Jan Logie] I have my doubts. I commend this bill to the House.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ian McKelvie): I call Simon O'Connor—a five-minute call.
Williams ArenaARENA WILLIAMS (Labour—Manurewa): Mr Speaker thank you for the opportunity to take a brief call on this COVID-19 Response (Courts Safety) Legislation Bill a bill that I am very much encouraged by the cross-partisan approach in this House tonight because we have heard three speeches of people who are committed to expanding access to justice—this is exactly what this bill is about. But I'm also encouraged especially by the comments of Mr Penk in how we should continue to work together to make sure that our justice system our courts are open to everyone—that everyone can access the court system in a fair way. This is what this bill does by empowering the judiciary to make the sorts of rules proactively that they need to do to protect vulnerable people who are compelled to be in court.And it empowers the judiciary to decide when audiovisual (AV) will be used. Things like in sexual violence cases which this Government has made important changes around allowing the use of AV in those cases. Now it's a very specific set of circumstances where you would use that. It's important the politicians aren't making that call because politicians think that we might use Zoom in all situations in Ruatōria or the Employment Court. But that's not what AV is for. It is used in a specific set of circumstances where that aids access to justice something that we are all committed to in this House. We use AV in the specific set of circumstances where you would not want someone to appear in court because they have had the kind of traumatic experience that we do not want them on the stand talking about them in there. It is a specific tool for a specific use and it's not what this bill does.I'm proud to stand on this side of the House speaking in favour of this bill which makes specific changes around protecting people in the COVID-19 circumstances and empowering the judiciary to make those calls. Thank you. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ian McKelvie): Our next call is a remote call—Simon O'Connor: You mean by AV?ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ian McKelvie): —and I call Golriz Ghahraman.
SpeechVANUSHI WALTERS (Labour—Upper Harbour): Thank you Mr Speaker. In preparing to speak on this bill tonight. I had looked through the first reading Hansard in which the Opposition supported this bill's passage through to select committee. I actually think my colleague who I have a lot of respect for Chris Penk who's just spoken covered very well in the first reading the rationale for the bill at that stage. His arguments in the first reading stand although I acknowledge that we may disagree about that at this stage so I'm going to refer to some of his comments in the first reading. But before I do I would just say that in my view it's good governance when you have foreseeable risks to put into place an empowering or framework legislation—it is good governance. This operates as a hinge allowing decision makers to open doors close them or adjust the size of the gap of an open door to respond at pace to change in very changing circumstances. At the first reading Mr Penk covered the high-level arguments for this bill. He spoke to the need for consistency in terms of our COVID response. There is still a foreseeable risk in terms of the pandemic and for the time being that justifies continuation of our broader COVID framework the COVID-19 Public Health Response Act. Consistency requires putting in place parallel empowering provisions for the judiciary. The second thing he spoke to at first reading and I might quote him because he said it beautifully was that we have participants in the court system who are compelled to take part. We shouldn't take lightly the fact that we are placing them in an environment that might be challenging from a public health perspective even at the same time as we require them to do so". Very eloquently put and I'm sure none of us have to stray far in our minds to think of the people we know who are at heightened risk. The changes in this bill essentially provide tools for the judiciary to ensure that individuals who are compelled to attend can do so in a safe way for them and for their family. Thirdly the concept of certainty: there's significant value in explicitly empowering the judiciary to create procedures in relation to COVID should they need to in response to public health advice. And again we are preparing for foreseeable risk and that's exactly what these provisions do. Finally I do think it's valuable to have a conversation about the way in which the courts can evolve and mature to suit today's world. I agree with Mr Penk on that. But it shouldn't happen in a way that mixes it together with pandemic response issues. That muddies the water as to where the appropriate balance of rights lies. So I look forward to that future conversation and I commend this bill to the House."
Rurawhe AdrianHouse resumed.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Mr Speaker the committee has considered the Appropriation (2020/21 Confirmation and Validation) Bill and reports progress. I move That the report be adopted. Motion agreed to.Report adopted.SPEAKER: The bill is set down for further consideration in committee next sitting day and given the proximity to 6 o'clock I will declare that it is now kai time. The House will resume at 7 o'clock. Sitting suspended from 5.58 p.m. to 7 p.m.
Annual Review Debate — COVID-19 Response
Seymour David; Hipkins ChrisDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Does the Minister think the comments of the Director-General of Health that rapid antigen tests that found themselves somehow from private warehouses to Government possession were consolidated into the Government's stock"—does the Minister think that was a good choice of words or would it be more accurate to say that a Government that spent a year decrying rapid antigen tests didn't order them let people order a selected amount subsequently found itself with none and basically nicked them? And can he offer reassurance to people who have had their rapid antigen tests taken at the border that he will ensure that Customs allows them to be released so that they can if not be used in New Zealand then go back to where they came from in order that refunds can be had particularly by schools that are out of pocket tens of thousands of dollars as a result. Or is that just too bad and we draw a line under the sorry saga of the Government's rapid antigen test handling? Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister for COVID-19 Response): The member is conflating two issues. One is the people trying to import rapid antigen tests that have not been approved for use in New Zealand and the other being whether or not the Government has directed for supplies that were destined for businesses and so on to be requisitioned by the Government. In answer to the latter part of the question absolutely not. In answer to the first issue that the member raised of course. We continue to have border restrictions around the importation of medical supplies and that will continue.I move That the committee report progress. Motion agreed to."
Hipkins ChrisHon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister for COVID-19 Response): In answer to that last question as I indicated to the member before the primary drivers around the sequencing at the border are around immigration issues not around COVID-19 public health issues. So one of the things that the Government has been trying to balance here is that not all visas are equal and not all visas produce equal value to New Zealand. We want to make sure that those that are the most critical and those that are the most valuable are actually getting in when we need them. So we don't want to have someone who's applying for a visa to come here for a couple of days getting their visa processed ahead of someone who's coming here to work to fill a critical job that the employers are desperate to get people in to fill. So the Government has been balancing that up and that is—you know we've got to acknowledge that we've got two years of built-up demand at the New Zealand border and we've been working to deal with that.In terms of the cost-benefit analysis the Government does always look at the impact of keeping any restrictions in place. We look at what that does in terms of spending—consumer spending patterns. We look at what that does in terms of the number of people in or out of the workforce. So we do get that analysis and that is something that we do weigh up.Teanau Tuiono asked about our plan around new variants. I can say that there is a lot of work that has been done over the last 18 months or so to continue to update and refine what we might do in response to new variants of COVID-19 that may emerge. I would say that the major thing that has changed in the last six months is that if a new variant of COVID-19 arrives in the country in all reality by the time we find out the potential impact of that new variant it will already be here. So whereas when we had a closed border we could learn from other countries' experience of new variants before deciding how we adapted here in New Zealand the reality is that for new variants now with the border relatively open we won't have that luxury so we will need to be ready to adapt as we need to to any new variants that come in and of course we are monitoring new variants on a daily basis.And finally in terms of Paxlovid I've got the answer that the member is looking for. It has arrived in the country. Pharmac I think announced that it arrived in the country on 31 March so I was right and it has been available since just after that.
Seymour DavidDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Just to clarify the Minister seems to have misunderstood and I hope not deliberately my last question. The problem with what he's done to the traffic light framework is that by taking out all of its features it no longer makes sense to have three traffic light colours. He should just say there are two rules and then if there was another outbreak or new variant he'd still have the traffic light system intact fully understood and able to be brought back. He's actually created the worst of all worlds by destroying the traffic light system and yet keeping in place rules that are devastating businesses in certain cities. Now the Minister said Don't worry. By having a limit of 200 people indoors we are helping solve the problem of people being absent from work because they're sick." Can the Minister stand up here and tell us what cost-benefit analysis the Government's done? How much has the amount of cases that we face each day been restricted and the absenteeism from work been restricted by a crowd size limit of 200? And how much does he think it's going to cost events and hospitality and do the costs outweigh the benefit? Because my sense is this Government doesn't do any cost-benefit analysis. They don't weigh up the impacts on people's lives against their mission of reducing COVID cases. Here's another question related to something another member just asked that the Minister kind of dodged. Can he honestly tell us: what is the cost-benefit analysis of allowing only 5000 international students only some horticultural workers only some people from certain countries? Can he honestly tell us that if we let people who weren't from non - visa waiver countries come in today alongside people that have visa waivers COVID-19 understands the visa waiver programme and would get around it and we'd have more COVID cases if we let people from non - visa waiver countries be reunited with their families? Because my electorate office—and I'm sure many people's electorate offices—is filled up with people being separated by things like that. The human costs are real. And if the Minister believes that he has a done cost-benefit analysis on only allowing people from visa waiver countries into the country right now then can he explain what those costs and benefits are? Because he keeps saying he's weighing it up and down but he can never tell us that he's done the work. Meanwhile the costs people pay are deep personal and expensive."
Tuiono TeanauTEANAU TUIONO (Green) (remote): Thank you Mr Chair. My questions follow on from that as well. I was wondering in terms of the traffic light system about what sort of mechanisms you've got in play just in case there is a stronger wave a post-Omicron wave as well? There's a lot of talk about loosening up stuff; what about if we actually need to tighten things up—so what you've got in place there as well. And if you could tell us that from the context of the capacity of front-line staff to actually deal with any potential new variants or a new outbreak as well. I echo the thanks to our front-line staff from folks around the Chamber as well. But it's also very important that we had that planning in mind. So I want to hear a little bit about your plans about that as well.And on the back of that what's being planned in terms of long COVID the impacts on our vulnerable communities you know compromised whānau and Māori and Pasifika as well? Thanks.
Seymour David; Hipkins Chris; Rurawhe AdrianDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Why is the Ministry of Education proposing to ban primary and intermediate State schools from charging intermediate fees? How much has been spent on this project to date? And does the Minister of Education realise that the only net effect is that kids will go to private schools like King's School instead of State schools like Remuera Intermediate School next door that are using their international fees to pay for things such as te reo Māori classes? How is that possibly a good use of the Ministry of Education's time to investigate such a crazy proposal?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): As the member indicated there was a consultation document issued. One of the drivers behind that of course was concern around the pastoral care for very young international students in an environment where there was significantly limited movement at the New Zealand border. We've had a lot of feedback on that. The Cabinet will consider that in due course and decisions will be made.DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): So if New Zealand is reopening its border will Cabinet dump this proposal to ban international student fees being charged by primary and intermediate State schools?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): As I indicated the Cabinet has not yet considered the feedback that has been received but it will do so.DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): But if the border and pastoral care during a time of a closed border was the rationale for the policy and the rationale has disappeared why would the Cabinet continue to consider it? Or was there some other rationale behind the policy that the Minister's not telling the committee about right now?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): Because when you ask people what they think it's generally a polite thing to then consider the feedback that they give you.DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): What would the Minister have to hear to continue the policy? Because if there's no possible rationale remaining for it wouldn't he be better to dump it rather than subjecting the principals of primary intermediate schools who rely on that revenue to ongoing uncertainty? Not to mention many people considering coming to or remaining in New Zealand who are seeing their educational options put in jeopardy by a Minister who continues a policy that he just admitted has no continuing rationale but curtly says it will be polite to keep listening and keeping those people in uncertainty?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): I envisage that the Cabinet will make a decision on that within the next month.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): I understand we have Teanau Tuiono.TEANAU TUIONO (Green) (remote): Thank you Mr Chairperson. Actually I asked my questions in the last round so that wasn't me.
Tuiono Teanau; Hipkins ChrisTEANAU TUIONO (Green) (remote): Thank you for those answers Minister. My next bunch of questions is around Māori education. I was wondering about your engagement with Te Rūnanga nui o Ngā Kura Kaupapa Māori because I have heard calls for the establishment of an independent Māori education authority. It makes sense with the Māori Health Authority and we support that as well. But I want to understand your thinking around there—given that the inequities that exist in health also exist in education as well—and if possible to talk about how he can reconcile that with our commitment to Te Tiriti o Waitangi. Kia ora.Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): The members will note that the Government's made a lot of progress around Māori-medium education—a significant expansion in our kura kaupapa and so on. What we have to acknowledge is that the majority of Māori students are learning in an English-medium environment. My colleague the Hon Kelvin Davis has been leading the work in that space and those questions are probably best directed to him. But it is something I've been working very closely with him on. I do believe that we should celebrate the fact that students in Māori-medium education actually are often doing better than the students in English-medium education and so we should be looking at Māori medium to see what we can learn from that. I don't disagree that there's more that we can do in that area and that's something the Government continues to work on.
Seymour DavidDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Thank you Mr Chair. Does the Minister stand by his statement he just made that he's only recently found out the science on high-efficiency particulate air filters versus windows. Does he agree that the time taken to replace the air in a room by opening the window or having a filter inside the room is a function of the flow rate of the filter or window and the volume of air in the classroom? And can he tell us about the new science where that calculation recently became available after he'd ordered the filters?
Tuiono TeanauTEANAU TUIONO (Green) (remote): Kia ora. Thank you Mr Chair. Just to follow up on one of those questions: I was wondering if the Minister could also tell us about guidelines that will go into schools and kura as well. One of the things I'm mindful of is that it's hard work being a teacher but expecting them to be health workers as well is a pretty tough call as well. So making sure that support is there I think is really important.Also some reflections on support for those that support our kids—learning support staff as well. What is going to be happening in that area as well? All of the situations that we find ourselves in with COVID also puts pressure on them so what's going to happen with making sure that that support for support staff is there? So some comments around that would be useful and helpful as well.Also what's happening with the high needs review—if the Minister could talk to that. And what has been achieved in the learning support action plan so far? Could he reflect on some of the comments from the Disability Rights Commissioner about the Government spending on residential schools for disabled kids compared to the support for schools and communities in general and how that balance will be struck to make sure that families that want to have that community support are supported to do so. Thank you.
Goldsmith PaulHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National): Thank you Mr Chair. Just in terms of the other issue of course when we think of how do we improve our educational outcomes obviously we need to have world-class teachers. We need to have a world-class curriculum which prepares our students to foot it with the best in the world—not just what we think is maths or science but what the rest of the world thinks is maths and science—and equipping them well to succeed.But the most fundamental thing that's required is that the kids are actually at school and we still—four years into this Government—have very poor attendance rates. There are overall so many children not attending regularly and I want to know what progress he has made if any on that. There has obviously been a real tension over this COVID period where many families have been so frightened that they haven't wanted to send their children back to school. I've heard comments from the Minister that they should be going back to school but I'd like to know how big an effort is being made and I'd like to challenge the Minister to say that there should be no area that is more important and more of a focus for his ministry and his team to focus on getting those kids back to school.Finally just a couple of questions in the tertiary space around particularly the reform of the technical training. I want to know why Te Pūkenga has not yet finalised its operating model and does the Minister still think he's on track for it to be self-sustaining by the end of 2022? Does he think it's acceptable that the CE of this new institution when questioned by the education select committee didn't know how many staff he had employed at the head office and didn't know which subsidiary Institutes of Technology and Polytechnics of New Zealand were operating at a deficit? Does he think that a Te Pūkenga head office of approximately 200 staff is meeting his intentions of a lean nimble head office that's not an additional bloated democracy sitting on top—an additional layer of bureaucracy sitting on top?And the final question is when is he actually going to focus on getting the international students back en masse to New Zealand and resuscitating—which is going to be a very long task—an industry that used to be our fourth-largest export earner?
Seymour David; Hipkins ChrisDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): If opening the window is up to five times more effective than having a portable air cleaner in a classroom why did the Government bother ordering so many portable air cleaners when did the Minister find out these facts and isn't it convenient that he's only saying this now because the Government's bungled getting those portable air cleaners delivered?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): The portable air cleaners were ordered before the latest science was available. There's no question about that. But there are a lot of classrooms in our schools which don't have natural ventilation and there are spaces within schools that don't have natural ventilation. So we will make use of the portable air cleaners that have been ordered.
Tuiono TeanauTEANAU TUIONO (Green) (remote): Thank you Mr Chair and tēnā koutou e te Whare. My question is around COVID in schools and I know a lot of parents around Parliament and also parents around the nation will be wondering about what's planned to come out for winter as well. Schools have been the hotbeds for COVID with large outbreaks in schools. In fact for tamariki and whānau in the last 10 days we've had over 25000 cases in schools alone and vaccination rates are low as well. So my question to the Minister—and there's a series of questions and I'm hoping he'll get to all of them—is how's the roll-out for the mechanical ventilation infiltration going? Will schools have this in place by the start of term 2 before winter kicks in and also is the Minister concerned about the wellbeing of children and their ability to focus and to learn in cold draughty classrooms as well because that's really important. We're knocking on the door—winter's nearly here as well. On the back of that as well when will teachers and students have free N95 masks and if they won't get them then why not? Also what is the Government doing to increase vaccination rates for tamariki Māori and Pasifika children in kura as well. So if the Minister could work his way through that. I'm especially interested in what's going to happen around ventilation infiltration air filtration—particularly as we move into winter. Thank you.
Salesa JennyEducationCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): The Minister of Education is now available for 30 minutes to respond to members' questions relating to education. Please note that members will have the opportunity to ask questions on the COVID-19 response once our time with education has ended.
Annual Review Debate — Commerce Consumer Affairs and Statistics
Salesa JennyCHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): Members our time with the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs and Minister of Statistics has ended—Hon Michael Woodhouse: Point of order. Madam Chair the Minister assumed the chair by my calculations at 4.27 and therefore we still have about eight minutes to go wherein in the second half of our exchange we were going to discuss matters related to his statistics portfolio. I just want to check the math on that.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): The Minister assumed the chair at around about 4.20. The Government has agreed the time that the Ministers are in the chair and when questions run over time that means that it cuts into the other sessions including the Minister of Education who is here for the education portfolio as well as COVID-19Hon Michael Woodhouse: Point of order Madam Chair. Can you give the House an absolute assurance that it was 4.20 when the Minister assumed the chair because I was checking the clock? I knew we were late but it was closer to 4.20—CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): If he wants to answer a question on statistics he is most welcome to.Hon Dr DAVID CLARK (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs): I'm more than happy to take a question from the member. Obviously it cuts into the next member's period but that's a decision for the Opposition to make and I'm happy to stay a little longer to answer his question.
McKee NicoleNICOLE McKEE (ACT): Thank you Madam Chair. Minister I'm going to be quite short and sharp with some of the questions. The first one is that New Zealand Police have obtained only 6 percent of their 80 percent key performance indicators for firearms administration in the licensing realm. My first question is: what percentage is the Minister expecting Police to fulfil out of that 80 percent this year—so come June and also come December 2022. I also have questions around the fact that Police have just released an extensive consultation document on clubs and ranges at a time when most people are involved with either the roar or the upcoming duck-shooting season. Does the Minister believe that allowing only a six-week time frame on what will become a community safety issue is good practice? Does the Minister have confidence in Police to be able to administer the firearms licensing regime along with the clubs and ranges administration regime and will she confirm that there'll be no further firearms licensing delays as a result of the new work for the administrators?
SpeechCHAIRPERSON (Ian McKelvie): Members our time with the Minister of Finance and for Infrastructure has ended. The Minister of Police is now available for 30 minutes to respond to members' questions.
Annual Review Debate — Finance and Infrastructure
Watts Simon; Robertson GrantSIMON WATTS (National—North Shore): Under this Minister and this Government Crown debt has grown significantly. So what I want to know is whether the Minister still stands by his statement that he mentioned in front of the committee that the cost of borrowing is manageable in the context of the international pressure around interest rates growing significantly over the next couple of years. The other question I have is around comments made by the Treasury noting the shortage of labour within the economy and that high levels of turnover in the labour market are expected soon.So I'm wanting to understand in terms of the levers the Minister's got at his disposal around allowing more labour into the market which has been completely blocked by this Government to date what he is going to do in order to provide some relief in terms of those constraints on the labour market. Lastly I quote—the Auditor-General said I have concerns on how Government is accountable to the public and this Parliament." So I'm interested in terms of his comments around that statement.Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): I thank the member for those questions and given the time I have available my answer to at least this one will be relatively brief. In terms of debt levels I remain very comfortable with where New Zealand's ended up. I didn't quite answer Chlöe Swarbrick's full question on that. Yes it is true that the forecasts as we were dealing with here in these documents saw us peaking at 40 percent. The member quoted our current debt levels which have settled on the monthly accounts a little under 35 but they are still forecast to reach 40 percent. I believe that it is an appropriate response and certainly for the benefit of the member compares extremely well to the rest of the world.If I look at the IMF's comparable measure for the 2021 year New Zealand's net debt was 14.8 percent; Canada 34.9; Australia 38.1; the United Kingdom 97.2 and the United States 101.9. So I do believe that we have done that well relative to the rest of the world. In answer to the member's second question around labour he'll be well aware with the opening up of the border and the bringing forward of those dates that we will be seeing significantly more people coming into New Zealand. We've obviously got the working holiday visa system open. We've got the 2021 work visa available to people here to regularise that. I absolutely recognise the pressure that the closed borders have had on the labour market. What I would say is that at the same time our investment in training New Zealanders during that period is bearing fruit as the Minister of Education indicated today with tens of thousands of people taking up apprenticeships and an unemployment rate of 3.2 percent shows that the labour market has had more flexibility. But I do know that employers will look forward to that point coming in. I can't quite remember the member's third question but I'm out of time anyway."
Court SimonSIMON COURT (ACT): Thank you Mr Chair. It's true there are many Simons in this House but there is only one Simon Court. To the Minister of Infrastructure: Minister in reply to a question I asked you written question No. 9773 (2022) the Minister states that PPP (public-private partnership projects) are privately financed so the private partner has skin in the game and only gets repaid after 25 years if the asset performs." So will the Minister call for more public-private partnerships so that projects like Mill Road Penlink four-laning from Whangārei to Port Marsden and three waters assets which when delivered allow communities to thrive; and if not why not?"
Seymour DavidDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Thank you Mr Chair. I want to ask the Minister in light of enormous spending inflation which he accepts—even if he thinks its imported—and the pressure that people are feeling on the cost of living what can the Government now do given the results of the last year for people who are actually net taxpayers? I don't mean handouts I don't mean extra benefits and I don't mean extra tax credits. I mean what sort of relief is the Government going to put in place so that people who are net taxpayers can handle some of the pressure that is being put on the cost of everything they consume?Simon Court: Mr Chair?Simon Watts: Mr Chair?CHAIRPERSON (Ian McKelvie): I call Simon Court.
Bishop ChrisCHRIS BISHOP (National): Thank you very much Mr Chair. I want to take the Minister to his infrastructure portfolio because two years ago it was a big day for infrastructure in New Zealand. The Hon Phil Twyford now sadly departed from the transport portfolio and Shane Jones announced the Infrastructure Reference Group process to identify so-called shovel-ready projects and they said that they would start within six months and the Government was going to spend many billions of dollars starting a range of difference projects. And of course now we are two years on and as I go through the quarterly Infrastructure Reference Group update—this is to the end of last year 31 December 2021—I see a huge number of projects that have been funded but not many that have been completed and in fact some that have not even started two years on after the projects were announced. I see an extraordinary number of projects in Northland: 32 projects alone in Northland and I think many members of the House will know why that is. So my question is to the Minister: is he satisfied in the administration of the shovel-ready project list? In particular is he satisfied that only three of the 32 projects in Northland have been completed four of the 25 in Waikato have been completed three of the 18 in Auckland have been completed and zero in Gisborne—five projects approved; zero projects completed in Gisborne? And I could go through the list but members I think get a flavour of the underperformance of the shovel-ready project list. Is the Minister satisfied with how the shovel-ready projects are going and if he's not what is he prepared to do to fix the problems?
Willis Nicola; Robertson GrantNICOLA WILLIS (Deputy Leader—National): I'll just bring the committee back to a discussion the Minister of Finance was having earlier. He's very proud of his Implementation Unit which is designed to ensure we actually get performance and delivery out of Government expenditure. Now I'm old-fashioned. I personally think that every single Minister should have that accountability and responsibility—that is actually what their warrant is about—but he's got his Implementation Unit. So my question is: what specific areas of shortcomings in Government delivery and spending has the Implementation Unit identified?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): The Implementation Unit does its work on a programme-by-programme basis so it identifies issues as it works through each of those. The mental health report as I mentioned to the member is publicly available for her to look at. It identified some weaknesses around the multi-agency nature of that programme and the fact that there was diffuse accountability as a result of that and that needed to be improved. There were some issues around reporting which we've already covered. It varies though. In other agency reports such as those around Jobs for Nature different issues have arisen particularly around the relationship with others who deliver as opposed to the Government—we fund others to do the delivery. So there's a number of cross-cutting issues there.I will just note as I'm about to resume my seat and noting the time I will now take the approach perhaps of not answering each individual question but stacking a few up in order that members get their opportunity.
Seymour David; Robertson GrantDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Thank you Mr Chair. I think people who are watching at home can say the answer to that last question was a yes. Then because Labour's got a lot of time and not much to talk about he kept on going. But I want to ask another question: this Government came in with a Wellbeing Budget. Jacinda Ardern sat on the stage with Bill Gates and said We won't just focus on one thing any more—it won't just be GDP. We'll focus on people's overall wellbeing." Now Minister you're responsible for the Treasury. Are you confident in the quality of advice the Treasury's given about balancing all the needs of New Zealanders' wellbeing through COVID? And I mean missed operations. Has there been any reporting on the cost of kids missing school due to the use of lockdowns? Have we weighed up the mental health of small-business owners against lockdowns in the COVID response? Are you confident that your Treasury has really reported in the spirit of a wellbeing Budget? Or is it the case that really it's just all been COVID and so many other aspects of New Zealanders' wellbeing have been forgotten when your Government's been making those decisions?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): The short answer—and I know the member likes a short answer on these matters—to that question is yes I am confident in that. Two aspects of that I'll draw out. One of those is that consistently while the Government has been making decisions about issues such as lockdowns alert levels the traffic light system the Treasury has continued to provide advice during that period of time about the overall wellbeing impacts of those decisions. I think again most New Zealanders would say that the fact that we have got ourselves through to this point in the pandemic with such a low death rate—with actually fewer days off work fewer days off school than many many other countries around the world—shows that the overall wellbeing of New Zealanders has been upheld.If the member cares to refer to the Wellbeing Outlook report in the Budget last year the member will see survey work undertaken there via Statistics New Zealand that actually showed that New Zealanders' overall wellbeing improved during COVID and that's because they had trust and faith in one another—that's called social capital and that's an important part of the wellbeing approach—and they felt well supported through economic interventions like the wage subsidy and that's part of financial capital which is also part of the wellbeing approach. So I welcome the member's interest in the wellbeing approach and his conversion to its importance within the Budget process. And the answer to this question is indeed yes."
Willis NicolaNICOLA WILLIS (Deputy Leader—National): We review these reports in the context of a cost of living crisis the highest inflation in 30 years with New Zealanders experiencing their standard of living declining as prices outpace wage growth. In that context the Government is spending more than ever and intends in the future Budget to add an additional $6 billion of expenditure. So I want to focus a few of my questions to the Minister of Finance on a report that I think is very significant and that is the report of the Controller and Auditor-General because what that report highlights is it says that the reporting done by this Government on the way that it spends money is inadequate. It highlights the fact that yes we have financial metrics about how much is spent—and goodness me we know a lot is spent; 68 percent more spent than when this Government came to power—but as the Office of the Auditor-General reports—and I quote—Increased risk is an inevitable result of the current environment." When policies are designed in a hurry for large sums of money or use higher-trust models they increase risks to probity.So there's first that set of concerns. So I want to ask about that—what the Minister has done to mitigate that given we're still as far as I know in the dark about how much of the COVID fund has been spent without public scrutiny of that spending.But the second thing which is more systematic is that the Auditor-General expressed concern in this review that current performance reporting about expenditure is completely inadequate. He states specifically that he does not believe current reporting gives Parliament or the public a clear picture about whether spending was worthwhile. And he goes on to say "Too often the reporting is focused on what is important to government agencies instead of what the public or Parliament cares about."So my question to the Minister of Finance is given one of the first gestures of his Government was to remove the Better Public Services targets which National used as a measure of public sector performance what is he going to do to respond to what I think are very grave concerns from the Office of the Auditor-General?"
SpeechANNUAL REVIEW DEBATEIn CommitteeCHAIRPERSON (Ian McKelvie): The House is in committee on the Appropriation (2020/21 Confirmation and Validation) Bill. This is a debate on the financial position of the Government and the annual review of departments officers of Parliament Crown entities public organisations and State enterprises as reported on by select committees. The time allocated for this debate is 10 hours. Standing Orders 356(2) and (3) have been set aside so there will be no sector-specific debates. Instead specific Ministers will be available each day to respond. The Government has indicated that the Minister of Finance the Minister for Infrastructure the Minister of Police the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs the Minister of Statistics the Minister of Education and the Minister for COVID-19 Response will be available today. The time for this debate has been allocated to parties on a proportional basis. New Zealand Labour has five hours and 25 minutes. New Zealand National has two hours and 45 minutes. The Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand has 50 minutes. ACT New Zealand has 50 minutes. Te Paati Māori has 10 minutes. Each debate will be led off by the chairperson or another member of the committee that considered annual reviews most closely related to the Minister's portfolios. A motion to report progress on a bill must be moved on a call not a point of order—Speaker's ruling 81. When a member moves to report progress on this annual review debate a presiding officer will call on that member first when the debate resumes. This is a similar process to that used in other debates when they are adjourned. At the conclusion of the debate questions will be put noting the committee reports on annual reviews and on the provisions of the Appropriation (2020/21 Confirmation and Validation) Bill. There is no amendment or debate on these questions. I remind members that they are able to participate remotely. If you're on Zoom and want to take a call please type call" into the chat. You should also use the chat if you want to raise a point of order. Finally it would be helpful for members to ask multiple questions if they have them of the available Minister during their call.Members we start with the Minister of Finance who is also the Minister for Infrastructure who is available for 45 minutes to respond to members' questions. The question is that the report of the Finance and Expenditure Committee on the annual financial statements of the Government for the 2021 financial year be noted.That's the longest speech I've ever made! I call the honourable Dr Duncan Webb."
SpeechPETITIONS PAPERS SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS AND INTRODUCTION OF BILLSSPEAKER: No petitions have been presented. No bills have been introduced. Ministers have delivered papers.CLERK: West Coast DHB Annual Report 2020/21 and Statement of Performance Expectations 2021/22Nelson-Marlborough DHB Annual Report 2020/21 Annual Plan incorporating Statement of Performance Expectations 2021/22Social Workers Registration Board Statement of Performance Expectations 2021/22.SPEAKER: I'm just waiting for the House to settle on both sides. Those papers are published under the authority of the House. Select committee reports have been delivered for presentation.CLERK: Report of the Finance and Expenditure Committee on the Standard Estimates Questionnaire 2022/23report of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee on the International treaty examination of the New Zealand - United Kingdom Free Trade Agreementreport of the Regulations Review Committee on the Complaint about the Local Government Members (2021/22) Amendment Determination (No 2) 2021.SPEAKER: The reports are set down for consideration.
SpeechTUESDAY 12 APRIL 2022The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.KARAKIA/PRAYERSSPEAKER: I have asked Marja Lubeck to say the prayer in Dutch today.MARJA LUBECK (Labour): Almachtige God wij danken u voor de zegeningen die ons geschonken zijn. We zetten alle persoonlijke belangen opzij erkennen de Koningin en bidden om leiding in onze beraadslagingen dat wij de zaken van het Parlement met wijsheid rechtvaardigheid barmhartigheid en nederigheid mogen leiden voor het welzijn en voor de vrede van Nieuw-Zeeland. Amen.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That urgency be accorded.Ayes 77New Zealand Labour 65; ACT New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 43New Zealand National 33; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.
VoteA party vote was called for on the question That the Fair Pay Agreements Bill be now read a first time.Ayes 77New Zealand Labour 65; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 10; Te Paati Māori 2.Noes 43New Zealand National 33; ACT New Zealand 10.Motion agreed to.Bill read a first time.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): The question is That the Fair Pay Agreements Bill be considered by the Education and Workforce Committee.Motion agreed to.Bill referred to the Education and Workforce Committee.
Fair Pay Agreements Bill — First Reading