ORAL QUESTIONS

QUESTIONS TO MINISTERS

Housing-Prime Minister's Statements

1. ANDREW LITTLE (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement on the housing crisis that "I wouldn't call it a crisis. We have strong demand, we have an uplift in prices-these are good problems to have actually"?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH (Prime Minister): Yes, and, as I said in that interview, the Government is spending over $300 million in emergency housing to provide an extra 2,150 emergency housing places around New Zealand-enough to support 8,000 families a year. Of course, getting more houses built faster would be easier if the Labour Party was not organising opposition to two of the large new developments in Auckland, in Three Kings Quarry and the Point England Reserve.

Andrew Little: What does he say to the Salvation Army, which is now turning away two to three homeless families a day, saying: "We've got nowhere to send them"?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: I would say to the Salvation Army-first, to thank it for the way it is working very closely with the Government, along with the other NGOs in Auckland, to get more houses on the ground faster, but, of course, both the Government and the Salvation Army would find it easier if the Labour Party was not organising opposition to the Three Kings development, which I think is 1,500 homes, and the Point England Reserve, which is also hundreds of homes-

Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! The answer has gone on for long enough.

Andrew Little: After the heartbreaking scenes last winter of families sleeping in cars and garages, and the promises from his Government to fix the issue, why is the crisis still getting worse?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: As I said to the member, the Salvation Army and others are working very closely with the Government around getting the $300 million spent. Money is not really the constraint here; it is the ability to get the houses and the non-government organisations on the ground able to execute. Of course, we would all find it easier if the Labour Party was not opposing developments-[Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order!

Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. In all three of the Prime Minister's answers he has introduced material that is irrelevant and for which he is not responsible. [Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! I do not agree with the member. The original question talked about a housing crisis. The Prime Minister has taken the opportunity of addressing what he thinks is part of the problem. One of the questions was "What would he say to the Salvation Army?", and I suspect that if the Prime Minister was talking to the Salvation Army, he would be saying exactly the things he is saying in these answers.

Andrew Little: Putting aside the Labour Party's longstanding support for the Hobsonville project and the Tmaki Redevelopment Company, what effect has the State house sell-off had on the stock of State houses available today and-just be straight with me-are there more or fewer than when we started?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: Because of the reforms of traditional State housing, we now have a great deal more interest in providing social housing: more capital, more expertise, and thousands of them being built. But, of course, we also need the development at Three Kings, which the Labour Party members are opposing, and the Point England Reserve development, which they supported before they changed their minds and now oppose. So how could they possibly get 100,000 houses built if they are opposed to any development? [Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order!

Andrew Little: How many families a night are staying in motels because there are not enough State houses for them?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: There are, of course, a number in motels, and the Government's response to that issue has been to spend $300 million on emergency housing and on building and procuring significant numbers more of social houses. But, of course, we are competing in a market that is a bit tight because the Three Kings development has been delayed now for several years. The opposition to it has been organised by the Labour Party and now it is setting out to oppose the Point England Reserve development and undo a Treaty settlement-and that has all been organised by the Labour Party.

Andrew Little: I seek leave to table a report from the Parliamentary Library, hitherto unpublished and, in fact, unknown, dated today, confirming that the number of motel rooms per night that is currently being funded by the Government is 400.

Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that information. Is there any objection? There is none. It can be tabled.

Document, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.

Andrew Little: How many of those 400 families, who have been put up in motels because he sold the State houses, are now facing being booted out of the motels and onto the street because the rooms are needed for thousands of visiting tourists attending the World Masters Games and the Lions tour?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: Of course, the Government agencies and non-government organisations will do whatever they can to meet the needs of people who have serious housing needs. They would like to be supported by the Labour Party-

Grant Robertson: You're the one not supporting it-things that you're not responsible for. Talk about what you do. You're the Government.

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: -supporting development, because we could get more social houses in Three Kings if the Labour Party was not opposing the development-[Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is little point in carrying on unless Mr Robertson ceases his barrage of interjections.

Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.

Mr SPEAKER: I will hear from Mr Robertson.

Grant Robertson: The reason for my interjections is the Prime Minister has continued to misrepresent Labour Party positions, for which he is not responsible at all.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! And that is no reason for the sort of behaviour from the member and the level of his interjection. If he feels that he has been misrepresented, then he knows there is a process for that. He lodges a breach of privilege via Standing Order-[Interruption]. Well, the member now shakes his head, as if he knows that is not the case; that is Standing Orders. Certainly, the way to address it is not the way the member just did, by yelling incessantly across the House. [Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The level of interjection from all sides is out of order and, frankly, out of control. It will settle down. If I need to do it with a more stringent measure, then I will do so.

Andrew Little: How badly has his Government failed New Zealanders when the social housing Minister's answer this morning to the housing crisis was to shrug her shoulders and say: "A motel is better than car."? Is a house really too much to ask for from this National Government?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: No. In fact, Government agencies, particularly in Auckland but also in other places, are asking exactly to get the houses that we need. One way the Labour Party could contribute to it is to stop opposing the Point England bill going through the House, because that will enable hundreds of social houses to be built. But the Labour Party is opposing it, as it is opposing the Three Kings development, which equally would allow for hundreds more social houses. [Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! That answer is quite long enough. [Interruption] Order! Order! Mr Twyford, when I stand to my feet that is certainly the time for Mr Twyford to cease interjecting.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: If political parties have supported 70,000 net-the population of Rotorua-coming here every year, without building the infrastructure including the housing of Rotorua every year, why are we having this sad argument between the guilty parties?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: Of course, the member may not realise but the people who are-in his words-guilty, are the Kiwis not leaving. Since he moved out of Government, 40,000 Kiwis per year more are staying in New Zealand. I would have thought that New Zealand First would regard that as success.

Job Growth-Reports

2. JONATHAN YOUNG (National-New Plymouth) to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on job growth in the New Zealand economy?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Finance): Overthe last year, 137,000 jobs have been added into the New Zealand economy. This job growth has been accompanied by rising wages for Kiwi families, with the average wage growing at twice the rate of inflation to $58,700 annually, currently, and forecast to reach $66,000 by 2021. Our strong employment growth has been coupled with strong economic growth of over 3 percent. This has not happened by accident; it is the result of hard work by households and businesses, backed by the Government's clear economic plan for our country's future.

Jonathan Young: How do New Zealand's employment statistics stack up against our international competitors?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Very well, in fact. New Zealand's employment rate for the proportion of the total population aged 15 years or older-right up to 115-at work is 66.9 percent. That is the highest rate that New Zealand has ever had, and the second-highest employment rate in the whole of the developed world. In particular, we are significantly ahead of our closet neighbour, Australia, whose employment rate is only 60.8 percent.

Jonathan Young: Are the jobs being created in New Zealand predominantly full time or part time, and how does this compare to Australia?

Tracey Martin: Full time being 30 hours.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I am just waiting for Tracey Martin to stop interjecting, and then we will have the answer.

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The bulk of the jobs being created in New Zealand are full-time jobs. In just the last year the percentage of New Zealand's labour force employed full time rose to just under 75 percent. If you compare that with Australia, its rate fell to just 64 percent. In fact, over half of New Zealand's entire population over 15 is now employed full time, compared with just 42 percent in Australia. With this record, it is strange to see some commentators advocate for New Zealand's monetary policy framework to be more like Australia's. We have achieved excellent results in this country, and I think it is possible that Australia needs to change to ours.

Jonathan Young: How is New Zealand's actual job creation tracking against previous estimates of job growth?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Very well. There have been 328,000 jobs-in addition-created since 2008, and Treasury expects further strong growth over the coming years. Members may recall Treasury's 2011 estimate, which was for 170,000 jobs to be created over the following 4 years. This was attacked by some critics as a failure and a broken promise because they did not think it would be achieved, only for the actual figure to come in at 197,000, some 27,000 more jobs than anticipated. It would be a shame for these critics to repeat their mistakes just because it is election year.

Grant Robertson: According to the household labour force survey, how many more New Zealanders are unemployed now than when his Government took office?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I do not have the exact number with me, but the key point is-for the member's benefit-how many people are employed. In New Zealand-in this country-we have passed 2.5 million people employed for the first time, and we have the second-highest employment rate in the OECD. That is progress.

James Shaw: Has he seen any reports about the loss of jobs and livelihoods caused by more frequent and more severe floods and droughts, resulting from climate change?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: No, I have not seen any recent reports in that regard. What I can say to the member is, actually, all the reports in New Zealand are of increasing numbers of jobs, in net terms. As I said, 137,000 extra jobs were added to the New Zealand economy last year-the second-highest employment rate in the OECD-and that is under the existing Government's policies, with support for the existing Government monetary policy framework, which seems to me an indication that other countries should look to us for inspiration.

James Shaw: What reports has he seen about the jobs lost because of the 2013 drought that wiped $1.5 billion off the economy, or more recent droughts in Northland and North Canterbury?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: One of the challenges to the New Zealand economy, particularly in the primary sector, is that droughts occur from time to time. That is one of the reasons why this Government is so keen to encourage the development of water storage in those areas, so that those businesses can be more sustained and can retain and grow more jobs. Those dams also provide better environmental outcomes by improving water flows. So, given the member's concern, I look forward to his support for that policy.

James Shaw: What reports has he seen about jobs lost and small businesses ruined from severe flooding in Whanganui, Northland, Auckland, or Edgecumbe?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The member raises some challenging times in terms of those floods for affected businesses, and the Government has been very supportive, not just in terms of floods but in terms of earthquakes as well. We are very supportive of tiding businesses over where we can until their solutions are solved and their insurance pays out. This country is challenged by some of the weather events, and has been for pretty much all the time that people have lived here. It is important that we set up a system that helps them respond, but New Zealanders are very resilient and, actually, we saw more than 100,000 jobs added just last year. That indicates the resilience of the New Zealand economy-137,000 jobs, in fact.

James Shaw: Does he agree with the Insurance Council's position that if nothing is done to adapt to climate change, then there are going to be increased claims and higher losses, which could lead to higher premiums and cover being withdrawn?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Well, actually, the insurance industry and New Zealanders respond to changes in the insurance environment all the time. The biggest impact on risk for New Zealanders is, in fact, earthquakes and the challenges that they bring, and we have seen that in sharp relief in recent years. Flooding is another risk. There are other risks, of course, in terms of fires and so on. The way we actually ensure that New Zealanders are resilient and able to respond to that is by keeping their incomes high and growing, by encouraging the development of our economy and investment in our productive industries, and by ensuring that the Government accounts are strong enough to be able to support people in their hour of need, and that is very much the focus of this Government.

James Shaw: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. There were two parts in my question, which was whether he agreed with the Insurance Council's position-

Mr SPEAKER: Order! No, I-[Interruption] Order! I heard the question very clearly and I do not think it has been addressed. I will invite the member to ask the question again.

James Shaw: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Does he agree with the Insurance Council's position that if nothing is done to adapt to climate change, then there are going to be increased claims and higher losses, which could lead to higher premiums and cover being withdrawn?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Well, the Insurance Council, obviously, always has its views in terms of how things could be impacted on, not just by climate change or earthquakes. I was pointing out to the member that there are a range of risks to New Zealand. Those risks and the insurance industry's perception of those risks change from time to time. I appreciate its view. Certainly, I think New Zealanders know that they do have to be prepared, and this Government is focused on being prepared, for any events but not just climate events.

James Shaw: When New Zealand jobs are on the line, does he agree with the Prime Minister that when it comes to the question of whether climate change is causing more floods and more droughts that "we don't spend time trying to connect the two"?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Well, the Government focuses on the range of risks that present for New Zealanders, and those risks that you identify is one group of risks. As I have pointed out to you a number of times today already, some of the bigger risks are those that do not involve climate change, including earthquakes and so on. So you have to respond to all of the range of risks that present for people. It is something the Government focuses on a lot, and certainly in terms of making sure that our books are resilient, so that if we have big incidents and shocks in the way that we have seen in recent years, we can respond and support New Zealanders.

James Shaw: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My question was whether he agreed with the Prime Minister's quote. He did not even mention the Prime Minister in his response.

Mr SPEAKER: It is a very marginal call, on my account, because you then talked about a range of risks and the Minister responded to that and the Minister said it was a focus of his Government. But, on balance, I will let the member ask that question again.

James Shaw: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Does he agree with the Prime Minister that when it comes to the question of whether climate change is causing more floods and more droughts that "we don't spend time trying to connect the two"?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Well, I agree with the sentiment from the Prime Minister, which is actually that we focus on the risks and managing those risks.

Police, Minister-Confidence

3. RON MARK (Deputy Leader-NZ First) to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in his Minister of Police; if so, why?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH (Prime Minister): Yes, because she is a competent Minister and is working with Police to implement a half-billion-dollar investment in the police of 1,100 new staff, including 880 uniformed staff right around the country.

Ron Mark: Is he aware that New Zealand First lodged an Official Information Act (OIA) request with both his office and with the Minister of Police on 3 February requesting all documents relating to his announcement to increase police numbers to 880 and that his office partially transferred that request to the Minister of Police on 16 February? Are you aware of that?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: I am not aware of all the administrative details, but I understand some documents related-or appropriately related-to the decision we released yesterday.

Ron Mark: Is he aware that (1) a month after receiving our original OIA request she then wrote to New Zealand First saying that she was extending her response to 7 April, and (2) that on 5 April, 2 months after receiving the initial OIA request, she then said she could not reply until 10 May? Is that a capable Minister?

Mr SPEAKER: There are two supplementary questions there. The Rt Hon Prime Minister.

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: Well, I am sure it is the habit of New Zealand First that the possible deputy leader consults with the leader on all matters related to correspondence, but in the National Government the Deputy Prime Minister does not consult me on all matters related to correspondence. [Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Interjections must cease from both.

Ron Mark: Is he aware that on 10 April at 6.26 p.m.-[Interruption] Well, we know that the "Minister for Myrtle Rust" does know what is going on in her department, do we not?

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Can I just ask for some cooperation from my right-hand side so we can hear the question without interjection.

Ron Mark: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Is he aware that on 10 April at 6.26 p.m. the Minister's office informed us that they would release information that we requested on 3 February to the public; and is that the action of an open, honest, and transparent Minister?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: Not only open and honest but also remarkably precise, by the sound of it.

Ron Mark: No, she is late. [Interruption] Do not worry sweetheart, there is more coming. [Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! On this occasion I do acknowledge he was responding to an interjection. I will allow the member now to continue with his supplementary question.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. You will have observed-and it is happening right now-that when my colleague got to his feet a barrage was coming from the front and back bench of the National Government, which is inexcusable and is against the Standing Orders, and they should be stopped.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have not observed it exactly the same way as the member describes. The member rose to his feet and started his supplementary question without any barrage of interjection at all, but as the member then got into his question and some of the facts that he detailed in his question, that is when I received without cooperation some further interjection from my right. I then told them they had to cease.

Ron Mark: How can he possibly have confidence in a Minister of Police who manipulates, obfuscates, delays, deceives, and misleads Parliament, or is this the new standard of Government that he is trying to lead?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: The Minister of Police has my full confidence. It sounds like she did a remarkably through job of dealing with what was no doubt a well-intentioned Official Information Act request, and now all the details of the considerations are available to that member as they are to the public.

Mr SPEAKER: Question No. 4, Dr Parmjeet Parmar.

Dr Parmjeet Parmar: Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Ron Mark: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.

Mr SPEAKER: I apologise to the member. Ron Mark-point of order.

Ron Mark: I have a number of tables that I wish to seek leave to document-

Hon Members: Ha, ha!

Ron Mark: I have a number of documents. [Interruption] Well, I can table a table. I have a number of documents that I wish to seek leave to table.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I need to hear the documents described.

Ron Mark: OK, the first one is an OIA request regarding a police resourcing announcement, lodged by the Minister of Police, to the Minister of Police, Police, the Prime Minister, the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, dated 3 February.

Mr SPEAKER: The second document?

Ron Mark: The second one is a letter dated 16 February from the Prime Minister-a partial transfer to the Minister of Police.

Mr SPEAKER: The next document?

Ron Mark: An extension letter dated 1 March from the Minister of Police, extending the deadline to 7 April.

Mr SPEAKER: And the next document?

Ron Mark: An extension letter dated 6 March regarding the transferred request from the Prime Minister extending the deadline to 7 April; a letter dated 4 April from the Minister of Police declining-

Hon member: Ha, ha!

Ron Mark: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.

Mr SPEAKER: The member is on a point of order. Would he hurry up and describe the document.

Ron Mark: The point of order is-[Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member is on a point of order.

Ron Mark: I know and I just raised another point of order.

Mr SPEAKER: No. We will deal with the first one first.

Ron Mark: Well, can you shut him up?

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I am getting to the stage where my patience will not last much longer. I will not even bother putting the leave very shortly. Continue with the description of the documents. You are on No.5-

Ron Mark: Thank you. A letter dated 4 April from the Minister of Police declining the OIA that was transferred to the Prime Minister because it will soon to be publicly available, but which the Minister failed-

Mr SPEAKER: Order! We do not need that. Just describe the documents.

Ron Mark: A letter dated 5 April from the Minister of Police, extending the OIA response to 10 May; an email from the Police dated 10 April, 3.59 p.m., advising the release of material, that day; an email from the office of the Minister of Police, dated 6.26 the same day, advising that material be released to the public.

Mr SPEAKER: I will not go back and relay all of those. There are nine documents that the member is seeking to table. Is there any objection to those nine documents being tabled? There is not. They can be tabled.

Documents, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Is it still a Standing Order and a Speaker's ruling and judgment that points of order will be heard in silence?

Mr SPEAKER: Yes there is, and the member knows that and on many occasions during points of order he has been guilty of interjecting as well.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I did not ask whether or not in the past that had happened. I wanted to know whether it was still a rule now and whether it was being applied, because when my colleague-

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume his seat immediately. [Interruption] The member will resume his seat. If the member had bothered to listen, I said right at the start when I got to me feet that, yes, there is a such a Standing Order and Speaker's ruling. It requires cooperation from everybody.

Mr SPEAKER: Question No. 5, Jacinda Ardern.

Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.

Dr Parmjeet Parmar: Excuse me, Mr Speaker.

Mr SPEAKER: No; sorry. We got interrupted. Question No. 4, Dr Parmjeet Parmar.

Domestic Violence-Updates

4. Dr PARMJEET PARMAR (National) to the Minister of Police: What updates has she received about the effectiveness of the Government's scheme to allow people to find out whether their partner has a history of domestic violence?

Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister of Police): In December 2015 we introduced a scheme that allows people to ask police whether their partner has a violent past. Sadly, there have been too many cases where people have been unable to find out whether their partner, or the partner of someone close to them, has a history of violence. The scheme has been used 158 times since it began, and 74 percent of requests for information have been approved by police. When police are able to provide people with information about their partner's history of violence, people can then make more informed choices about their relationships.

Dr Parmjeet Parmar: How does this scheme work?

Hon PAULA BENNETT: A disclosure request can be made to police by the partner of the potentially violent person or by a concerned third party, such as a family member. Police can also proactively release information if they believe someone is at risk of violence from their partner. The police have made 117 proactive requests; 41 have been by a third party. Preventing family violence is a priority for Police and this Government.

Dr Parmjeet Parmar: What examples does she have of how the scheme has helped people to leave potentially violent relationships?

Hon PAULA BENNETT: Police have told me about a disclosure they made to a young woman who was in a relationship with a man whom they knew to have had multiple relationships with very young women where he began to manipulate and use emotional abuse, and they saw that increasing. Police believed the woman was at risk, as his behaviour was escalating towards becoming violent. When police approached her to make the voluntary disclosure, she said she had seen the man's behaviour deteriorating, and, as a result, she left the relationship and moved back in with family.

State Care-Prime Minister's Statements

5. JACINDA ARDERN (Deputy Leader-Labour) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement in regards to survivors of abuse while in State care that "they've been able to come forward, have their story heard, get some compensation. Some of them aren't necessarily satisfied with that"?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH (Prime Minister): Yes. We have no problem acknowledging that for some people in State care in past decades, abuse occurred of the type that has left them with long-lasting and traumatic damage. The Government is focused on two responses to that. One is through various forms such as the listening service and, now, the service offered by the Ministry of Social Development. Individuals affected can come forward, have their story heard, and be paid compensation, and, of course, if criminal matters arise from that, they can then go to the police. The second strand has been to set out to change the system, which I understand many of the victims would like to see. That is why we have recently launched the Ministry for Vulnerable Children, Oranga Tamariki: precisely to move on from and greatly improve on some of the errors of the past.

Jacinda Ardern: When he said "There has been a form of that inquiry through the listening service that ran for seven years, designed to get to the bottom of these issues", did he realise that this service closed while there were still people waiting to be heard?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: Yes, and that is why the opportunity made available to them subsequent to the closure of the service has been significantly improved, significantly sped up, in a way that enables more people to be heard, to receive an apology, and to receive compensation.

Jacinda Ardern: If those abused in State care have "had their story heard", why did Caroline Henwood, the person charged with hearing those stories as part of the Government's closed Confidential Listening and Assistance Service, recommend that an independent body be set up to look at the extent of State abuse?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: Judge Henwood made a report on the basis of the listening service when it was concluded. I understand and appreciate that some people, including Judge Henwood, do have a view that there should be a broad inquiry, so there has been some discussion publicly about just what would be achieved by such an inquiry in addition to hearing the individual cases, apologising, and compensating, and completely changing the system on a scale that has not occurred since the late 1980s.

Jacinda Ardern: Has he seen the interviews in full with those in State care who featured on The Hui on Sunday?

Carmel Sepuloni: Did he even watch it?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: I have not seen those interviews-

Carmel Sepuloni: No, he didn't.

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: Well, just listen.

Carmel Sepuloni: Someone else needs to listen.

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: No, no. I have had the opportunity as a member of Parliament to sit through dozens of such interviews-dozens of them, not just with those who were children in care of the State but also with those who had suffered significant abuse in our mental health services and in our prisons. Again, I repeat that the Government is providing the opportunity-which we are quite open to tweaking or changing if the discussion leads us that way-for cases to be heard, for an apology, and for compensation, and, more significantly, has set out to change the system. In my discussions with people who are victims, they want both of those things to happen.

Jacinda Ardern: How can he guarantee that harm is not happening now, when we still do not even have an independent complaints process for children and their families who are in care?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: The member actually raises a very pertinent issue. The first step that has been taken there has been the setting up of an independent NGO entity called VOYCE-and a number of us have met the people involved with that-which gives a voice and independent advocacy for children. Children in care today can go to that service-it is quite independent from Government-and will be protected, I can assure the member of that. With respect to a proper independent complaints inquiry, I understand that is under discussion, for the reasons that I am sure the member would like to see it.

Jacinda Ardern: Is he claiming that VOYCE, a group funded by the Tindall Foundation and the Vodafone Foundation, is the official complaints process for Child, Youth and Family?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: No. I said it was a first step and, for the first time, there is the opportunity for children to obtain independent advocacy. With respect to independent complaint services, the Children's Commissioner has been there since 1989. That has turned out not to be satisfactory, and so there is discussion going on as we speak about an independent complaints service.

Electricity Market-Pricing

6. FLETCHER TABUTEAU (NZ First) to the Minister of Energy and Resources: Why hasn't the Government called for a full-scale inquiry into retail electricity prices, given the percentage increase in power pricing?

Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Energy and Resources): We are not calling for a full-scale inquiry into retail electricity prices, because there is no reason to. The electricity market is more competitive than it has ever been, following this Government's 2009 Ministerial Review of Electricity Market Performance. Retail power prices have fallen in real terms for the first time in 15 years, in the year to March 2016, by 2.1 percent. Statistics New Zealand's 2015-16 household expenditure survey shows electricity is just 2.9 percent of average weekly household expenditure-the lowest proportion of household budget since 2000-01. That compares with 3.6 percent in the previous survey of 2012-13. That is a decrease of 5.6 percent.

Fletcher Tabuteau: Can she explain to Kiwi families and small businesses why electricity prices have skyrocketed 148 percent since National's so-called 1998 reforms that were meant to lower prices? [Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I will hear from the Hon Judith Collins. [Interruption] Order!

Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Well, the member is simply wrong. I am happy to provide and to table, for that member's benefit, the figures given to me by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment relating to this. These are, of course, obtained specifically from the Department of Statistics.

Fletcher Tabuteau: How could wholesale electricity prices, like at thuhu, for example, average just over 6 cents per kilowatt hour but become 29 cents per kilowatt hour once sold to consumers and small businesses?

Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Well, I suggest that there is often a difference between wholesale prices and retail prices.

Fletcher Tabuteau: Does she believe that after-tax profits of over half a billion dollars, reported by Mercury, Meridian, and Genesis last year alone, are good for struggling households on fixed incomes, or, for that matter, small businesses just trying to stay afloat?

Hon JUDITH COLLINS: I think that if we can say the average electricity spend for a household is just 2.9 percent of the average weekly household expenditure, then that is actually a relatively good percentage compared with many other places in the world. I would say that our electricity market has not undergone some of the issues that some other electricity markets have, particularly around security of supply.

Question No. 3 to Minister

Richard Prosser: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek your guidance with regard to the point of order raised by Mr Mark in the earlier question. During the course of making his point of order, he sought to make another point of order. Looking at Speaker's ruling 21/6, it says: "If members take exception to anything said in the course of debate which they consider a breach of order that it is their duty to point out, they should do so at once and not take it upon themselves to deal with it later in the debate." This refers to debate, obviously, and there does not appear to be anything in the Standing Orders to preclude the calling of a point of order within a point of order. I wonder whether you could give some thought to this and perhaps come back to us and clarify whether doing so at once-in other words, calling attention to a breach of order, which Mr Mark was, with reference to an interjection-

Hon Gerry Brownlee: One of the important things about calling a point of order is that it is, in fact, a point of order and not something you devise to attract attention to oneself.

Ron Mark: Speaking to the point of order, that is precisely the point. How would you or Mr Brownlee know whether my second point of order was or was not a legitimate point of order if you did not hear it? If Mr Brownlee has got a crystal ball down there, I would love to have a look at it sometime! [Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: And I myself am blushing. [Interruption] Could we have a little bit of order while I rule on this matter. [Interruption] Order! All points of order and circumstances-I am addressing Richard Prosser's point of order-are never quite the same on two occasions. When I consider the laborious process Mr Mark was going through in seeking to table documents that he thought might have been informative to the House, but when I consider them now were more about making a political point, inevitably there is going to be an objection or an interjection across the House. It should not happen, but it is no different than an answer being given recently by Minister Judith Collins and Mr Winston Peters taking objection to it and interjecting to that answer across the House. I will do my best to maintain order in the House, and it is certainly not helped by the last point of order raised by Ron Mark.

Ron Mark: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.

Mr SPEAKER: Is it a fresh point of order?

Ron Mark: Yes, totally. Shall I take it now, from your very considered view just given, Mr Speaker, that if I think a Government member is giving a laborious reply or a laborious point of order, it is quite OK for me to interject like that man over there did?

Mr SPEAKER: I remind the member that on many, many occasions he has done just that.

Communities of Learning-Announcements

7. Dr JIAN YANG (National) to the Minister of Education: What recent announcements has she made regarding Communities of Learning?

Hon HEKIA PARATA (Minister of Education): This morning I was pleased to announce that a further 17 communities of learning have been established, bringing the total to almost 200. There are now 184 early learning services, 1,630 schools, and four tertiary providers covering more than half a million young people in khui ako across the country. I am particularly pleased to see that the number of early learning services joining communities of learning has doubled in just 4 months, with 20 percent of khui ako now having the full nought to 18 learning pathway represented. Finally, in amongst all this good news, I was pleased to announce that more than 1,100 teachers and principals have been appointed to new roles. It is fantastic to see so many talented individuals in the sector taking up these new roles.

Dr Jian Yang: How do communities of learning support achievement for our young people?

Hon HEKIA PARATA: In so many ways. Communities of learning are about end-to-end education pathways with children and young people at the very centre. The achievement challenges that a khui ako sets, using its shared data, are about raising the achievement of all participating students. Communities of learning are designed to ensure all children and young people can benefit from the expertise and experience of the most skilled teachers and education leaders in their communities.

Mn ka whakarongo n mema Premata, ka ako rtou me phea te haere o Te Khui Ako.

[If those members of Parliament listen, they will learn how Communities of Learning operate.]

Khui ako are intended to raise the quality of teaching and leadership across a whole community through sharing, expertise, and resources. I thank the member from New Zealand First for enjoying that answer so much.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Minister can resume her seat.

Finance, Minister-Statements

8. GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour-Wellington Central) to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by the statement he made on behalf of the then Minister of Finance, "we have a very ambitious target for export growth"; if so, what progress has been made towards that target?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Finance): Yes, it is an ambitious target, which the Government is committed to under the Business Growth Agenda by 2025, which, I remind the member, is just 8 years away. Notwithstanding some current headwinds, which include a decrease in world trade intensity, the big drop in dairy prices, and an unscheduled Statistics New Zealand revision, exports by value have grown and real exports as a percentage of GDP have held relatively steady and our goods and services exports have grown tremendously in markets where we have free-trade agreements.

Grant Robertson: Can he confirm that the export target referred to in the primary question was that his Government would lift exports from 30 percent to 40 percent of GDP and that, using the methodology used in the Business Growth Agenda, exports have in fact decreased as a percentage of GDP?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: In terms of the first part of the question, that is the target to be achieved by 2025. In terms of the second part of the question, real exports as a percentage of GDP, which is the figure I am referring to, have dropped slightly in the last calendar year, but they have actually been remarkably steady over the last 10 or 12 years. I think the achievement for our exporters has been that despite a large drop in dairy exports, the exports overall have grown.

Grant Robertson: Why has the value of New Zealand's overseas merchandise trade fallen in real terms by $603 million since 2008?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Well, in the modern world we do not just talk about merchandise trade; we talk about goods and services. In fact, for the member's benefit, more and more of New Zealand's exports are now in services rather than in goods, which is all about adding value to volume, which, I think, the member used to be in favour of. So, overall, our exports-I do not have the figure since 2008-in the last 2 years have grown from just under $68 billion to $70 billion, despite a drop of $5 billion in dairy exports.

Grant Robertson: Why was the target to lift exports to 40 percent of GDP not included in the Trade Agenda 2030 policy announced recently by the Government?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: It is included in the Business Growth Agenda targets and it will be in the next update.

Grant Robertson: When he was asked in February what had happened to the target to lift exports as a percentage of GDP and he said "Watch this space.", did literally he mean that there is now a void because he had ditched the target?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: This is why the member is known as a trainspotter. He is an absolute trainspotter. He does not actually focus on the substance of anything. He literally looks at little bits of paper all day and tries to work out where the inconsistency is. This Government is proud of its record, which has seen exports grow at the same time as the dairy industry has gone back $5 billion. The member may recall that a couple of years ago he thought that the dairy industry declining would mean the end of New Zealand exports. He was wrong.

Grant Robertson: I seek leave of the House to table a document compiled by the Parliamentary Library tracking exports of goods and services as a percentage of GDP, showing that it has dropped since the National Government came to office.

Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that particular information. Is there any objection? [Interruption] Is there objection or does the member want to speak to the point of order?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I just wanted to check whether it was a real or nominal.

Mr SPEAKER: The member is asking-

Grant Robertson: It's real-real. It's the same methodology.

Mr SPEAKER: It is real. I will put the leave and the House will decide. Leave is sought to table it. Is there any objection? There is no objection; it can be tabled.

Housing Affordability-Homeownership

9. DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader-ACT) to the Minister for Building and Construction: Does he agree with Liam Dann in the New Zealand Herald that "Young house hunters should just give up."; if not, why not?

Hon AMY ADAMS (Minister of Justice) on behalf of the Minister for Building and Construction: No, for a number of reasons. Firstly, because the Auckland market is easing and we have seen median house prices in Auckland fall 8.5 percent since October. Secondly, we are in the middle of the longest, strongest boom Auckland has ever seen, and only today Colliers reported that 2,770 apartments are due to be completed this year-the highest since 2005-with 3,840 apartments expected next year. Thirdly, the HomeStart grants scheme-the most generous support for first-home buyers in a generation-has provided almost $130 million in grants, which has helped over 27,000 people into their first home, with about 2,500 of them in Auckland. I also note that there are currently over 1,800 listings on TradeMe in Auckland for properties advertised under $600,000. [Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order!

David Seymour: In respect of the number of homes being built, does the Minister agree that the current so-called house-building boom still gives us a lower number of homes built per capita than any of the decades from the 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, or the 2000s?

Hon AMY ADAMS: I have not had the opportunity to study the data that the member is referring to, but what I can tell the member is that the number of houses being built in Auckland at the moment-of 10,000 a year-is the highest in 10 years. The work that this Government has done around freeing up land supply, around supporting housing projects, is a big part of the reason for that growth, but we could move a lot faster if there was more support across communities in this House.

David Seymour: Is then Shamubeel Eaqub wrong when he says that New Zealand has underbuilt to the tune of half a million houses; if not, why not?

Hon AMY ADAMS: What I would say is that this is a Government that is doing everything it can to see more houses being built, which is why the number has almost doubled since we have been in Government. If it was not for opposition across this House and across communities to things like the RMA reform, to things like the special housing areas, and to things like Three Kings and Point England, we would be seeing even more houses built even faster-but thanks to this Government, we are seeing more built in Auckland than we have for 10 years.

David Seymour: In respect of RMA reform, is the Minister disappointed that his own Government ended up voting against many of Amy Adams' most important proposed reforms, which I put up in the RMA bill as amendments during the Committee stage, such as recognising the importance of land supply, economic development, and infrastructure, which would have made it easier to build homes?

Hon AMY ADAMS: What I will say is that this Government is absolutely confident that the reforms that it has passed will help to further speed up the supply of land and houses into both the Auckland and the New Zealand markets. [Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order!

David Seymour: Does the Minister have any advice for thrifty young homebuyers attempting to save faster than they can earn, when the average price of housing in Auckland rose by $114,000 last year and is now over $1 million?

Hon AMY ADAMS: What I would say to homebuyers is that with interest rates at low levels, houses are more affordable now than they have been for some time. Actually, whether you look at the average or the median house prices in Auckland, over the last several months they have been falling, which is an encouraging sign.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I want to check the number of supplementary questions this member has been given. I cannot believe this sadism should go on like the way it is.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! If the member attempts to use more than his allocation, I will handle it.

David Seymour: Indeed, has the Minister enjoyed standing in for Nick Smith today, and has she asked the Prime Minister whether she can do it more permanently, as of 1 May?

Hon AMY ADAMS: I always enjoy being a part of this team.

David Seymour: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. [Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Mr Peters, you might have noticed we now have a point of order, so it is meant to be heard in silence.

David Seymour: In the course of some of the barracking in this question, Ron Mark called me, I think, an idiot, which is not only unparliamentary but, as the events of today have shown, it is a bit hypocritical.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I was going to assist the member, until the last part of his point of order.

Military Personnel Remains-Repatriation

10. MAUREEN PUGH (National) to the Minister of Veterans' Affairs: What announcements has he made regarding repatriation of military personnel remains?

Hon DAVID BENNETT (Minister of Veterans' Affairs): The New Zealand Government has announced that it is giving the families of military personnel and their dependants the opportunity to repatriate the remains of their loved ones buried in Malaysia and Singapore between 1955 and 1971. This decision comes as a result of recommendations of the Veterans' Advisory Board, and the advocacy of the Royal New Zealand Returned and Services' Association and affected families. I would like to especially acknowledge the petition of the families of the forgotten fallen who presented to this Parliament last year. It is about making an unfair situation fair.

Maureen Pugh: How many veterans would potentially be included in this announcement?

Hon DAVID BENNETT: Between 1955 and 1971 there was inconsistency in how repatriation occurred. Prior to 1955 there was no expectation of repatriation. After 1971 all bodies were repatriated. Between 1955 and 1971 some families had repatriation where they paid towards the costs. Others were not informed or were discouraged from repatriation. Meanwhile, civil servants were repatriated. There are 36 families that will be given the opportunity to repatriate from cemeteries in Singapore and Malaysia. This covers the Malaya- and Vietnam-conflict military personnel. The New Zealand Defence Force will consider extending the process to a further 13 families who have loved ones buried in other locations around the world from the same period of time. The Government is rectifying the inconsistencies of the past in repatriation for affected families.

Maureen Pugh: What are the options for the families for repatriation?

Hon DAVID BENNETT: The initial step in the process is for families to contact the New Zealand Defence Force. The families will have the choice as to whether or not to repatriate from the overseas cemeteries. We understand that this is a sensitive issue for many families, especially those with particular cultural considerations. For those who choose to have their loved ones brought back to New Zealand, it is now a process that will be worked through with the New Zealand Defence Force. The Government is determined to right the wrongs of the past and give repatriation to those families who wish to do so. It is time to bring them home.

State Care-Children

11. JAN LOGIE (Green) to the Minister for Social Development: Is she satisfied that, according to her answer to written question 1048, she could not say how many children were reported to have been seriously abused in State care in 2015/16?

Hon AMY ADAMS (Minister of Justice) on behalf of the Minister for Social Development: Yes. As was explained in the answer to the written question, the methodology for the reporting of the abuse of children in care is changing quite dramatically from previous years. The approach for 2015-16 is that all types of abuse, across a larger population, will now be considered and the manual work required to create this data set has not yet been completed but will be publicly available in the second half of this year. I would also like to note that it was only under this Government that reporting began on these numbers, in 2010-11. I would also like to add that the previous Child, Youth and Family, now the Ministry for Vulnerable Children, Oranga Tamariki, puts the safety and well-being of children in its care above all else, and it has clear policy and guidelines in place for responding to any complaints or allegations, including safety assessments, and referral to police when warranted.

Jan Logie: Does she share the concern of former social development Minister, Paula Bennett, who, in response to questions from the Green Party about why the Government was not reporting, in 2011 said: "It, quite frankly, horrified me that we didn't know how many children and young people in our care were abused and re-abused.", particularly at this time of restructuring, when, potentially, mistakes might be made that could result in more children being hurt?

Hon AMY ADAMS: We absolutely recognise the need to know and understand how many children in care have been abused, which is why we are now taking the opportunity to count larger numbers of abuse types, across a larger population-because while this Government started the collection of that data, we now want to go even further and ensure we have the fullest possible picture of the abuse that might happen in any type of State care. That work is taking time but it is absolutely being collected and will be reported.

Jan Logie: Why is she not adding extra reporting criteria to the previous one, instead of creating a new one, which will make it impossible to track whether more or fewer kids are experiencing serious abuse in care?

Hon AMY ADAMS: We are adding further criteria, but what we have to do is go through the files manually, and if we had gone through them manually on the old set it would have taken even longer and duplicated the work. So to get to the answer, the decision was made by the Ministry for Social Development that rather than duplicate the repeat of the narrower set, it wanted to go through those files once and get the most comprehensive answer. We are not going to be losing visibility. That information is being collected and will be reported in the second half of this year.

Joanne Hayes: What work is the Minister doing to ensure that current and future children in care are able to raise any concerns or complaints?

Hon AMY ADAMS: As part of the new Ministry for Vulnerable Children, Oranga Tamariki-which was launched on 1 April-changes have already been made to ensure that children and young people have increased visibility and access to a feedback and complaints mechanism that listens and responds to their voices. The feedback and complaints response is a crucial component of the support we wrap around our most vulnerable children to help ensure their safety and support them to thrive. Work is also under way to establish an oversight of the ministry's feedback and complaints mechanism. Also launched from 1 April was VOYCE - Whakarongo Mai, a NGO that provides children and young people in care with a network of contacts and peers that will support them and ensure their voices are heard.

Jan Logie: When the last available figures showed that a child in State care was being seriously abused every 9 days-a 25 percent increase in the very short time that her Government reported-how is it OK to stop reporting this information?

Hon AMY ADAMS: I repeat again that we have not stopped collecting the information. We are, in fact, going through the process of building a much more comprehensive way of reporting, counting a wider scope of abuse across a wider population, because, in this Government's view, all abuse in any form of State care is insidious and unacceptable and we want to have visibility of it all. That data is being collected, and will be reported this year.

Jan Logie: Is the Minister hiding an increase in the number of children being abused in State care?

Hon AMY ADAMS: I am really not sure how I can put this any more clearly. The information is being counted and will be released, and it will be more comprehensive than any information that has previously been put out. I think I have made it very clear that we want to see the widest range of analysis of all types of abuse in all types of care. That work is being done now and will be reported. There has been no stop in collection and there has been no hiding of data. We are getting the information now and it will be reported in the second half of this year.

Housing-Prime Minister's Statements

12. CARMEL SEPULONI (Labour-Kelston) to the Associate Minister for Social Housing: Does he stand by the former Prime Minister who said "If they're sleeping in a car, my very strong advice is to go and see Work and Income and we'll see what we can do"?

Hon ALFRED NGARO (Associate Minister for Social Housing): No one in genuine hardship should be living rough on the streets or in cars. I do agree with the former Prime Minister; they should go to see Work and Income.

Carmel Sepuloni: What impact will the upcoming World Masters Games-which is estimated to draw 35,000 contestants and supporters to Auckland-have on individuals and families who are homeless and requiring emergency accommodation from the 21 to the 30 April?

Hon ALFRED NGARO: We have been working hard-the team has been working hard-to ensure that we have a range of options that are available to our families, and to our individuals as well. We have pre-booked motel rooms at rates that are not much greater than we usually expect to pay. What I can assure the member too is that since we have invested-the first Government-$354 million into emergency housing, our baseline is that we have 265 places that are tenanted by families, with another 220 that are coming online in the next few months. We can say, on top of that, that there are another 430 places, and roughly half of those are coming online in the next few months as well.

Carmel Sepuloni: How many motel rooms has he pre-booked during the World Masters Games period to ensure those requiring emergency accommodation have access to it, particularly in light of the number of 400 per night who we know are requiring emergency accommodation already at this time?

Hon ALFRED NGARO: What I can tell the member is that there are roughly around 350 people a week who access the special needs grants. Of those, we know that there are places that are already in place-as I have said, 265 places that are there as well. We have a range of options, not just motels. There are other options that are there. We also have the emergency houses coming online as well. What I can say to the member is that earlier this month, with the Prime Minister, we actually launched Luke Street, which is in thuhu. That is 43 units of transitional housing in thuhu. That means 250 mums and dads and their children-for up to 12 weeks-will have warm and dry accommodation as well. In Kepa Road, in rkei-as soon as the weather clears-there will be six modular houses on site. In South Auckland-soon to be announced-there will be another 63 units available as well.

Carmel Sepuloni: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My question was really clear. I asked how many motel rooms he had booked during the World Masters Games period, and he has given a number of other-

Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is all we need. The question is how many motel rooms have been pre-booked during the games.

Hon ALFRED NGARO: In my answer I said there are a number that have been pre-booked. I can get the number for the member, if the member would like to put that in writing. What I said was that there are a number of options. There have been pre-booked motels. There are actually houses that are in place at the moment-

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The question has now been addressed.

Carmel Sepuloni: Given that Auckland accommodation is so stretched that 53 American tourists stranded by a cancelled flight had to stay overnight at Te Puea Marae in February this year, how does he expect Work and Income to ensure homeless families are not sleeping in their cars when there are 35,000 extra tourists in Auckland needing accommodation?

Hon ALFRED NGARO: This Government has been working in partnership with a number of providers. Part of that initiative is around Housing First Auckland. This complements the programme of work that this Government has been doing at the moment. We are piloting a programme of 472 homeless over Auckland, costing around about $4.5 million over 2 years. The Government takes its responsibility around homelessness seriously. The question around homelessness is a partnership with Government and emergency housing providers, as well as community housing providers, also.

Carmel Sepuloni: Can he guarantee that his "team's been working hard to make sure we've got that covered", and that no one who approaches Work and Income in need of emergency accommodation during the World Masters Games will be turned away without some form of safe housing?

Hon ALFRED NGARO: I have great faith in the team, which has been working hard. We work hard because there is a genuine response to meet those needs. Our providers, who are out there at the moment, are in touch and on the ground. We are working with emergency housing providers to ensure that we have confidence that we are meeting those needs. If there are contingencies that need to be put in place, we know the team is prepared and ready for that as well.

© Scoop Media