ORAL QUESTIONS

QUESTIONS TO MINISTERS

Question No. 2 to Minister

Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I want to raise a point of order with you regarding oral question No. 2, as set down on the Order Paper today. Originally, when this question was set down, there were no quotation marks in the question. When the Minister's office queried that, additional quotation marks were inserted by the Office of the Clerk from "will miss" all the way through to "$2 billion". When that was further queried, it turned out that there was no such quotation in existence. The quotation marks now exist around the words "self-imposed", and only the words "self-imposed", and I have been advised quite clearly that the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research's report and forecast does not use those words at all. Therefore, how can this question stand when the quotation marks, or the quotation that is in there, does not relate to the report that is the subject of the question?

Hon AMY ADAMS (National—Selwyn): The question was submitted by our officers. It was authenticated to the satisfaction of your office. The changes that were made were made by your office, and then, subsequently, changes that relate to quotation marks. The question, none the less, has been properly authenticated and properly accepted, and it should stand.

SPEAKER: I understand that the authentication was a media report on the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research report—

Hon Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Does that mean that in a primary question, a quotation unattributed from any media commentary about the report in question can be inserted in a question with no context or no attribution?

SPEAKER: No, that does not mean that. I know that there was quite a lot of back and forth around the authentication on this particular question. The point that I will make to the member is that I am the final authority on this, and, if at any stage after I have received it—at midday, or 11.30, when I see the questions, right up until the time of this House—someone had come to my office and had a discussion and made a good case, we would have changed the question yet again. But, from my perspective, actually, to get to the essence of the question, no quotation is necessary.

• Question No. 1—Prime Minister

1. Hon PAULA BENNETT (Deputy Leader—National) to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by all her Government's statements and actions?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS (Acting Prime Minister): Yes.

Hon Paula Bennett: Is she still committed to doubling the refugee quota to 1,500, as she has said as recently as Monday?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: The Government hasn't finalised commitments around increasing refugee numbers yet. Nothing has gone to Cabinet.

SPEAKER: I will remind the Minister to say "on behalf of" at the—oh no, actually, he's the Acting Prime Minister; he doesn't. He is the Prime Minister. I apologise. [Interruption] Order! Order! I don't expect that level of interjection when I apologise for making a mistake.

Hon Paula Bennett: Does she expect her coalition partner, New Zealand First, to support her promise to double the number of refugees?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: As I said, all these decisions are made through Cabinet. New Zealand First has their position; we have our position. The best interests of New Zealand are at heart, and the decisions will be finalised at Cabinet.

Hon Paula Bennett: If she backs down on this commitment, then what certainty can the country have on anything that she promises?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: The country can have certainty that we will raise income levels, that we will increase housing, that we'll invest in the regions. The country can be assured that this Government will implement all of our promises.

Hon Paula Bennett: Will all three Government parties be voting in favour of the Electoral (Entrenchment of Māori Seats) Amendment Bill?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Again, these are decisions that haven't yet gone to Cabinet. We do have different perspectives, but we do—

Hon Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I'm surprised you didn't rule the question out of order. The Prime Minister has no responsibility for how parties vote on a member's bill.

SPEAKER: I'm going to get the member to repeat the question. I thought she did refer to parties which consist of the Government, which leaves open the question that it could have been discussed with the parties in her role as Prime Minister as opposed to as the leader of the Labour Party. Ask the question again, please.

Hon Paula Bennett: Will all three Government parties be voting in favour of the Electoral (Entrenchment of Māori Seats) Amendment Bill?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: That's a decision for each of the parties to make.

Hon Paula Bennett: Does the coalition Government support the retention or the entrenchment or the removal of the Māori seats?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Sorry, I didn't hear the first part of the question. Can she repeat it?

Hon Paula Bennett: Does the coalition Government support the retention or the entrenchment or the removal of the Māori seats?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Again, each party in the coalition Government will make up their own decision.

Hon Paula Bennett: As Prime Minister, does she understand that the relationship of trust and integrity with her Ministers is vital and one that she controls; and, if so, why does she need an inquiry into Meka Whaitiri? Doesn't she trust her word?

Hon Chris Hipkins: What about the National Party's inquiry? How many months of—

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: I'm not going to prejudge the outcome—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Order! Order! Can I just ask the Leader of the House to show a bit of good example?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: I'm not going to prejudge the outcome of the investigation. Natural justice must apply. The investigation must be allowed to run, to be fair to both parties.

Hon Paula Bennett: Does the Prime Minister decide who holds a ministerial warrant; and, if so, then shouldn't she be just be asking Meka Whaitiri exactly what happened with her staff member and judging whether she is worthy of that warrant based on her word?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: To answer the first part of the question, yes.

Hon Paula Bennett: Does bringing in Ministerial Services mean that she doesn't trust Meka Whaitiri's account of what happened?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: No. As I've said, there is an investigation going on, and to comment further may prejudice that investigation.

Hon Paula Bennett: Does she understand that it's not an employment issue; it is an issue of her as Prime Minister having trust in her Ministers as to whether or not they are worthy to hold a warrant?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: The Prime Minister expects high standards of her Ministers, and if those standards aren't met, well, then there will be consequences.

• Question No. 2—Finance

2. Hon AMY ADAMS (National—Selwyn) to the Minister of Finance: Has he seen NZIER's forecast indicating the Government will miss its "self-imposed" 2021-22 debt target by $2 billion, and how does that reconcile with the Prime Minister's statement last week that these rules will not be relaxed?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): I have seen a report of that forecast, and I respectfully disagree with it.

Hon Amy Adams: How does he reconcile the Prime Minister's unequivocal statement that the debt rules would not be relaxed with his own comments on Q+A over the weekend that even if the debt target was missed, he would still consider he'd done "a good job".

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: There's absolutely no contradiction between those two positions. We will meet our debt targets. If we missed it to the extent that the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research (NZIER) believes, it would be 20.6 percent instead of 20 percent. That would still be a very low debt target, and, I might say, lower than what the National Party reached in the last six years they were in office.

Hon Amy Adams: Is he aware that the 0.6 percent of GDP that NZIER are forecasting the Government to miss the debt target by equates to $2 billion too much debt, and, if so, does he really think that being out by $2 billion is him doing a good job?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As with the last Government, this Government measures our debt targets as a percentage of GDP. When we look at that percentage of GDP, 20 percent will be very low by international terms. If we were to be talking in dollar terms, then the last Government might want to explain the $40 billion or $50 billion extra debt they racked up.

Hon Amy Adams: Why did he ignore Treasury advice that substantial borrowing by Crown entities would be seen as an attempt to circumvent his net debt target, and could, in fact, undermine his own Budget responsibility rules?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: For the same reasons that the National Government ignored the same advice from Treasury when they established the facility for Housing New Zealand to borrow, at the time of which a Minister in that Government said, "we believe that external financing will deliver additional commercial discipline for Housing New Zealand." Once again, I agree with Amy Adams about that.

Hon Amy Adams: Well, given that he's so keen to draw parallels with the last Government, is he aware that he actually inherited Crown entity debt of just half a percent of GDP, but Budget 2018 blew this out more than four times to 2.2 percent, or $6 billion?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: What we have done is provide the facility for Housing New Zealand and the New Zealand Transport Agency to be able to get on with making up for the under-investment from the previous Government, because the actual reason we need the money is to build some houses.

Hon Amy Adams: So why did he ignore Treasury advice, again, that borrowing through Crown entities would have the same effect on fiscal resilience, the same effect on credit ratings, as borrowing through core Crown mechanisms, but would cost the taxpayer tens of millions of dollars more in interest costs than borrowing through core Crown facilities?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Well, I do wonder whether the member asking the question could reflect on the following statement: "Given Housing New Zealand's strong credit rating, a domestic wholesale bond programme is expected to cater for the full … financing requirement and represents the lowest cost option in terms of facility set up costs and interest costs."

Hon Member: Who said that?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Amy Adams—former finance Minister.

SPEAKER: I'm contemplating whether that actually addressed the question, but we'll go on to the next one.

• Question No. 3—Agriculture

3. GARETH HUGHES (Green) to the Minister of Agriculture: Does he stand by his statement about the current use of feedlots, "Clearly it is not the mainstream type of production for New Zealand. But we are open to innovative ways to produce good quality beef. This is one of them"; if so, does he see any brand risk to New Zealand agriculture?

Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR (Minister of Agriculture): Thank you, Mr Speaker. Yes, I stand by my statement. The feedlot in question has been run well over the 27 years of its operation and is recognised for the quality of product it sells to the market. That feedlot's pens consist of straw bedding on a stabilised base. It is situated close to the coast because it provides more of a temperate climate for the animals. I'm unaware of there being any animal welfare issues at that site; however, I'm acutely aware that whatever there is in terms of poor environmental stewardship across our country or poor animal welfare or bad working conditions, that could result in risk to our agricultural brand.

Gareth Hughes: Does he agree with the New Zealand Animal Law Association, that say that feedlots are a breach of section 10 of the Animal Welfare Act, as the cows are not provided with adequate shelter and cannot display normal patterns of behaviour such as grazing?

SPEAKER: Well, it's sort of a legal opinion, but we'll say it's a policy matter.

Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: No. For the most part, the primary sector and farmers are working hard alongside the Government to improve sustainability and find new ways of doing things that get them more value from what they produce. The Government's commitment to a new way of working was highlighted a couple of weeks ago when I launched a $40 million – a-year Sustainable Food & Fibre Futures fund, which will help the sector invest in projects that get more value for their exports and produce them in a more sustainable way.

Gareth Hughes: Does he agree with Fish & Game New Zealand, who call the continued existence of feedlots an indictment on New Zealand?

Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: No.

Gareth Hughes: Is the Ministry for Primary Industries investigating concerns raised about the ANZCO feedlot farm in Ashburton, which intensively farms 14,000 cattle?

Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: I'm aware of accusations but no investigations at all.

Gareth Hughes: Will the Minister ask his ministry to review the animal welfare code on the use of feedlots to ensure high-quality animal welfare standards, environmental protection, and the safeguarding of our agricultural export brand?

Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: No, I don't believe so. I think the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee has been through all the codes of animal welfare. They have a very good independent oversight of animal welfare standards in this country, and I'll make sure that they do everything necessary to uphold them.

• Question No. 4—Foreign Affairs

4. Hon TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua) to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: Does he stand by all his statements?

Hon DAVID PARKER (Acting Minister of Foreign Affairs) Yes, in their context.

Hon Todd McClay: Why did he say this week that it was not Government policy to increase the refugee quota to 1,500 per year, when the Prime Minister confirmed the same day that it remained Government policy?

Hon DAVID PARKER: Because the Deputy Prime Minister and the Prime Minister are both correct. The Prime Minister is saying that it is Labour Party policy to double the quota to 1,500. It is the New Zealand First policy that they are not yet across the line on that, and both agree it's a Cabinet decision.

Hon Todd McClay: Has he informed the Prime Minister that she is wrong when she said on Monday that the Government remained committed to increasing the refugee quota to 1,500; and, if not, why not?

Hon DAVID PARKER: Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister both agree it's a decision for Cabinet.

Hon Todd McClay: What message does it send to the public when the Prime Minister and her foreign affairs Minister are at odds on the Government's policies to increase the refugee quota to 1,500 per year?

Hon DAVID PARKER: The message it sends this week, as last week, and as at the time of the last election is that this was a policy of the Labour Party, that this is a coalition Government, and that these decisions are for Cabinet.

Hon Todd McClay: Well, what message does it send to our international partners when the Prime Minister and her foreign affairs Minister are at odds on fundamental foreign policy issues, like refugees?

Hon DAVID PARKER: They're not.

Hon Todd McClay: Is it any surprise that business confidence levels are at record lows when the Prime Minister and her deputy and foreign affairs Minister are at odds with each other on so many important issues and the Government is a shambles?

Hon DAVID PARKER: They're not; you're making it up. Sorry, not you, Mr Speaker. The member is making it up.

• Question No. 5—Finance

5. Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour—New Lynn) to the Minister of Finance: What progress, if any, is being made on the coalition Government's well-being approach to Budget 2019?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): This Government wants a well-being focus to drive the decisions we make about Government policies and Budget priorities. This means adding to traditional measures, such as GDP, a wider set of indicators of success: the health of our environment, our people, and our communities. Our approach includes Treasury's Living Standards Framework and its four capitals, human, financial, natural, and social; Statistics New Zealand's Indicators Aotearoa New Zealand project, which will have indicators across all dimensions of well-being for New Zealanders; and the programme of State sector reform announced by Minister Hipkins yesterday, which will also include reform of the Public Finance Act. Together, these tools and processes will help us put together Budget 2019 and future Budgets on the basis of a rigorous framework that will include a wide range of issues and measures of success.

Dr Deborah Russell: How is this approach different to previous Government Budgets?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Budget 2019 will be focused on initiatives that support long-term intergenerational well-being. It requires Ministers and agencies to work together on funding bids aimed at those long-term outcomes rather than their individual needs. We will always have a careful and close eye on our fiscal performance, but New Zealanders have told us that that is not sufficient. A Budget needs to reflect the importance of the health of our people, our environment, and our communities, and that is what will begin in Budget 2019.

Dr Deborah Russell: Why is this approach necessary?

Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As I told the international well-being conference this morning, it is necessary because New Zealanders are rightly concerned that despite enviable GDP growth, we've found ourselves being reported as having the worst homelessness in the world. A narrow approach to value and purpose will not allow us to meet the challenges and opportunities of a rapidly changing world of work, mitigate climate change, or address inequality. This Government wants a country that's prosperous but cares about who shares in that prosperity, where we will look after our land and water, and where we make our communities stronger. We need to use the Budget process to make that happen, and that is what we are committed to.

SPEAKER: I just advise the member that he's getting the Bill English approach to his collar. It's not a Minister of Finance thing; I think it should cease.

• Question No. 6—Immigration

6. Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National) to the Minister of Immigration: Does he stand by all of his statements and actions?

Hon Iain Lees-Galloway: Mr Speaker? [Minister sitting in wheelchair]

SPEAKER: Oh—the member was going to put his hand up. The Hon Iain Lees-Galloway.

Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Minister of Immigration): On any other day, I would happily stand by all my statements and actions. For today, the member will have to accept that I sit by them in the context in which they were made and taken.

Hon Michael Woodhouse: Is it the Government's policy to increase the refugee quota to 1,500 in this term of Parliament; if not, why not?

Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: I personally remain committed to increasing the refugee quota during this term of Parliament, but there has been no Cabinet decision made at this time.

Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. With all due respect, the member Mr Iain Lees-Galloway was not asked for his personal opinion. The Hon Iain Lees-Galloway, Minister of Immigration, was asked a question about Government policy. Shouldn't he give an answer about Government policy rather than expressing his own view?

SPEAKER: Well, did the member listen to the answer?

Hon Gerry Brownlee: I did. The answer was—

SPEAKER: Well, I distinctly heard the Minister say no Cabinet decision has been made.

Hon Michael Woodhouse: If increasing the quota—

Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. He should have elucidated whether or not, as a Minister, he supports that proposal—if he's taking it to Cabinet or not. He could talk about whatever he likes.

SPEAKER: That's not the question that he was asked.

Hon Gerry Brownlee: Well, with all due respect, I think you're ruling far too narrowly on how a question should be answered.

SPEAKER: I can accept that the member thinks that.

Hon Michael Woodhouse: If increasing the refugee quota is not presently Government policy, why did Budget 2018 provide $7.7 million of new capital to expand the Māngere Refugee Resettlement Centre to "help us meet future commitments"?

Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: Because that expansion is required whether or not there is an increase to the refugee quota. That expansion is required to support good maintenance of that facility.

Hon Michael Woodhouse: Not true. Does he agree with—

Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Is it in order for a member to suggest that I have misled the House, in that fashion?

SPEAKER: I think he—it's not polite, but it doesn't breach the Standing Orders unless the member indicates that it was a deliberate misleading, and I don't think he went that far.

Hon Michael Woodhouse: Does he agree with Acting Prime Minister Kevin Davis' comments that "It is our policy that we wanted to double the quota to 1,500, but it hasn't gone through Cabinet yet, so it's not Government policy.", and, if so, what reliance can be placed on ministerial commitments made prior to matters being considered by Cabinet?

Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: In answer to the first part of the question, yes.

Hon Michael Woodhouse: When he said, "We are very firm in our commitment to increase that quota and our commitment before the election was to do that during the first term in Government, and that is still my plan.", was he speaking in his ministerial capacity?

Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: Yes, and I have made it very clear on a number of occasions that it is a policy that I am pursuing as Minister, but that there is a Cabinet process that has to be gone through, and that I am yet to take that Cabinet paper to Cabinet, and there is yet to be a Cabinet decision.

Hon James Shaw: Given that the Opposition has asked three questions about this today, if legislation was introduced into the House to increase the refugee quota, would he anticipate that the Opposition would put their money where their mouth is and vote for it?

SPEAKER: I think everyone knows that the Minister has no responsibility for that, including the member who asked the question and who's getting pretty close to being disorderly.

Hon Michael Woodhouse: What confidence can this House or the wider public have that any commitment that he makes as immigration Minister can be relied on before Winston Peters says it can?

Hon IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: I committed to introduce KiwiBuild settings; we've done that. I committed to make changes to post-study work rights; we have done that. And I have committed to making a number of other changes, and the member can be absolutely certain that this Government is committed to introducing an immigration system that actually works for New Zealand, that works for migrants, that works for employers, unlike what we inherited from the previous Minister.

Greg O'Connor: What benefits do former refugees bring to New Zealand?

Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: Refugees are often highly skilled, have a strong work ethic, and are very happy to be here. They contribute to New Zealand's growth and prosperity. I'm aware of research that shows a $2 return for every dollar invested in former refugees.

• Question No. 7—Education

7. VIRGINIA ANDERSEN (Labour) to the Minister of Education: What announcements has he made about upgrading the condition of classrooms in New Zealand?

SPEAKER: I call Chris Hipkins and wish him happy birthday.

Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): On Monday, the Prime Minister and I announced a major upgrade to the redevelopment of Wainuiomata High School. The Government will be doubling the $12 million committed by the previous Government to the redevelopment, increasing that fund to $24 million, so that the school can have a full redevelopment rather than a partial one. This is a sign of the Government's commitment to providing its over-600 students with safe, modern classrooms to learn in.

Virginia Andersen: What other recent announcements have been made on the rebuild of new classrooms around the country?

Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Last week, the Prime Minister and I announced $47 million to repair Otumoetai College's buildings in Tauranga, which suffered from leaks and deteriorating classrooms. This will provide them with 57 new classrooms and a new library for the up to 1,950 students that attend that school.

Hon Member: Where did the money from, Chris? Where did the money come from?

Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: We also provided $6 million to redevelop the classroom block at Tauranga Girls' College which is also leaking. In answer to the questions from the members' opposite—they're welcome to ask one if they want to—the funding all came from this years' Budget.

Virginia Andersen: How many expansion, rebuild, redevelopment, and roll-growth announcements have been made since Budget 2018?

Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Heaps. I won't go through all of them, but we have committed to a rebuild of Onepoto primary school—

SPEAKER: Order! The question asked for a number, not a list.

Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Mr Speaker, I'm happy to count them up. Heaps—I did answer "heaps".

SPEAKER: All right, well, the member's finished, then.

Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I haven't got a numerical count for those—

SPEAKER: The member's finished.

Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Sorry, Mr Speaker, I do. There are 111 roll-growth classrooms. There are five redevelopments, two expansions, one relocation and rebuild, one rebuild, one new State build, and one new school and site for a wharekura.

• Question No. 8—Crown/Mori Relations

8. Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (National) to the Minister for Crown/Māori Relations: What are his priorities for the Crown/Māori Relations portfolio?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS (Minister for Crown/Māori Relations): As the Minister, my priority is to strengthen and grow the relationship and partnership between the Crown and Māori, now and into the future. An announcement on the final scope of the portfolio will be made soon.

Hon Christopher Finlayson: What is his understanding of the term "Crown" in the phrase "Crown/Māori Relations"?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: The Government.

Hon Christopher Finlayson: Sorry, what was that?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: The Government.

Hon Christopher Finlayson: I couldn't hear it.

SPEAKER: The Government.

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: The Government.

Hon Christopher Finlayson: Well, has it been a priority since he became the Minister to ensure that State-owned enterprises, Crown research institutes, and Crown entities are aware of their obligation to contribute to a positive Crown/Māori relationship, and, if so, what precisely has he done?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: What precisely we have done is go around the country holding engagement huis with Māori, and anybody who is involved in those organisations that he spoke about was welcome to attend.

Hon Christopher Finlayson: Has it been a priority since he became Minister to work out what his role in Government is, and, if so, what does he do?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: An announcement will be made very shortly about the scope of the portfolio, and, let me say, I spent some two months engaging with Māori all across the country. They're very happy with the approach of the Government. One of the big things that the previous Government did wrong was that they thought consultation with Māori involved meeting with 73 iwi leaders three or four times a year, when the feedback we've received from across the country is that we need to actually—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Order! Order! I'm going to interrupt the member. The rest of this answer is going to be heard in silence. I think that there are some interesting aspects to that reaction.

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: As I was saying before I was so rudely interrupted, one of the mistakes that the previous Government made was thinking that consultation with Māori was restricted to about 73 iwi leaders, when what we were told—the feedback we received from Māori across the country—was that we should be engaging with all Māori. It's consistent with article 2 of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, which says, "Ko te Kuini o Ingarani ka wakarite ka wakaae ki nga Rangatira ki nga hapu—ki nga tangata katoa o Nu Tirani te tino rangatiratanga o o ratou wenua o ratou kainga me o ratou taonga".

[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]

The words there that were most important were "nga tangata katoa o Nu Tirani"—all of the people of New Zealand, of whom, in 1840, 99 percent were Māori.

Hon Christopher Finlayson: What particular policies and programmes has he initiated in his portfolio in the 10 months since he became the Minister?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: There's been quite a lot of work. Let me start to rattle a few off: working with kōhanga reo sort out their claim, working with wānanga to sort out issues that they've had, and working with various iwi on matters that the previous Government stuffed up—just as an example.

Hon Christopher Finlayson: Was his role as chair of the Labour Māori caucus good preparation for his work in the portfolio, and, if so, does he think his experience in "organising the feeds while we had a yarn" is being put to good use now that he's the Minister?

Hon KELVIN DAVIS: No, because in our engagement huis there are officials who organise the feeds, and they were actually very nice, thank you very much.

• Question No. 9—Defence

9. MARK PATTERSON (NZ First) to the Minister of Defence: What progress, if any, has been made regarding the procurement of a dive and hydrographic vessel for the Navy?

Hon RON MARK (Minister of Defence): During the recess period, I announced the procurement of a Norwegian dive and hydrographic vessel MV Edda Fonn, at a total cost of $103 million, including military modifications. The ship replaces two vessels decommissioned—

SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume his seat. Look, Mr Robertson, can I say that indicating with any number of fingers in that way is disorderly. But what I am going to say to both yourself and the Hon Gerry Brownlee is that if you want to have a private conversation about previous Governments have one, but some people are interested in this answer.

Hon RON MARK: As I was saying, at a total cost of $103 million, including military modifications, this ship seen here replaces two vessels decommissioned in 2012 and 2018 and will provide the navy with the ability to conduct a range of specialist diving and hydrographic tasks in support of our community, our nation, and the world—and there you go. [Minister shows pictures of vessel]

SPEAKER: Right. Put that away, thank you.

Mark Patterson: What type of task will this vessel undertake?

Hon RON MARK: The types of tasks this vessel is likely to undertake include humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR); underwater search and rescue such as, unfortunately, often is the case, jointly with police; surveying the seabed following natural disasters such as was done with the Manawanui in Kaikōura and Lyttelton post the two big earthquakes; supporting larger ships to disembark equipment and personnel—again very useful in HADR operations—and removing unexploded historical ordnance such as we've done in the Solomon Islands. It will also be there and available to assist with scientific research.

Mark Patterson: How is this vessel superior to the two ships it replaced?

Hon RON MARK: This vessel is far superior, in fact in one of the graphics that I didn't bring along we can show that with the size and scale at 85 metres long, nearly 3,000 tonnes, total load of 5,700 tonnes, you could actually fit the old Manawanui on the back of the deck of this one. This ship replaces the Manawanui and the Resolution. Some of the enhanced capabilities include a 100-tonne salvage crane; remotely operated vehicles; a contemporary dynamic positioning system, which enables them under severe sea states to maintain total stability—very important when putting divers down and when doing scientific research. It is an extremely effective vessel and the lily pad on the front will enable us to land all of our helicopters: the A109, the NH90, and Seasprites in sea states up to 3, which is very good.

Mark Patterson: When will the vessel enter service and what will it be named?

Hon RON MARK: This vessel, which has been warmly welcomed by the navy in Devonport will enter service—we anticipate it will be here in New Zealand in May next year for its second fit, once we take possession, and it will go into dock. The owners will conduct the first tranche of modifications. It'll come into New Zealand in May, and the second tranche of modifications will be done with the assistance of local defence industry. We're hoping to have it actually totally completely in service in November next year, but it will be available on a phased basis for operations prior to that.

• Question No. 10—Agriculture

10. Hon NATHAN GUY (National—Ōtaki) to the Minister of Agriculture: Does he stand by all of his statements and actions?

Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR (Minister of Agriculture): Yes.

Hon Nathan Guy: Did the Prime Minister tell him that she wants to receive advice from the Farming Leaders Group for free and not his Primary Sector Council, which costs taxpayers $500,000 a year?

SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume his seat. The member will rephrase the question so it relates to the primary question.

Hon Nathan Guy: Did the Prime Minister tell him that she wants to receive advice from the Farming Leaders Group and not his Primary Sector Council?

SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume his seat. The member's going to have one more try to ask a question which relates to the primary question.

Hon Nathan Guy: Is the Minister aware of the fact that the Prime Minister has said to him that she would prefer to receive advice from the Farming Leaders Group rather than his Primary Sector Council?

SPEAKER: I'm going to let the Minister answer it, but I will say to the member that even then, strictly, I shouldn't have.

Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: No.

Hon Nathan Guy: When he was referring to cost increases on farmers, reported in Rural News on 21 August as saying "get used to it", what specific advice has he received on these Government-increased costs?

Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: I have been upfront with farmers all the way through. We have said that we will require higher standards in water around the rural properties, and I'm sure that farmers, just as they have been committed to this for some time, appreciate that they have to reach a higher standard. The swimmable-level standard offered by the last Government was, quite frankly, pathetic, and they knew that and they understand that they've got to spend more money to reach swimmable standards that are truly credible.

Hon Nathan Guy: In light of that answer, what specific advice has he had from officials that is going to confirm to farmers that there are going to be increased costs from this Government?

Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: What I can say is that we are rolling out a programme moving from volume to value, and, indeed, focusing on the values of New Zealand production. We're being honest with the farming sector, saying that we do have to have higher standards of animal welfare, we do have to have higher standards of environmental management, and we do have to pay our workers more so we can attract more people to the primary sectors. That will be an additional cost, but this Government's focused on farmers getting more value for what they do now—more returns, not just asking them to do more.

Hon Nathan Guy: In light of that answer, why can't he be more specific on what these increased costs are likely to be? He has already indicated that—

SPEAKER: Order! Order!

Hon Nathan Guy: The Minister—

SPEAKER: The question, all right?

Hon Nathan Guy: Yes. Why can't the Minister be more specific about these increased costs, like he has already alluded to the fact that bringing agriculture into the emissions trading scheme (ETS) will cost on average $5,000 per farm; what further advice has he had about these increased costs? He must have had advice—

SPEAKER: Order!

Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: Happy to, Mr Speaker.

SPEAKER: No, it is—

Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: Oh, please.

SPEAKER: The member will resume his seat. We had three cracks at the first supplementary, and that one was just wandering all over the paddock.

Hon Nathan Guy: What specific advice has he had from his officials, in terms of numbers—dollars—that farmers can expect his Government to see increased costs on their business?

Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR: I'm trying to be absolutely honest with them, and I can't predict the cost that the meat companies or the dairy companies may impose upon farmers to meet new standards of assurance. What I can say in regard to climate change is that there are no set figures, but I am using figures off the basis of Lincoln University predictions. There are no decisions on whether to bring agriculture into the ETS. But off the figures developed by Lincoln University, they estimated that it could be around $5,000. That's the figure that I've quoted publicly. I'm happy to explain. It's a guesstimate at best, and we're working through the process to be absolutely upfront and honest with all the farmers across New Zealand.

• Question No. 11—Social Development

11. PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Labour) to the Minister for Social Development: What recent initiatives has she announced that provide opportunities for people looking for work?

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Mr Speaker? [Minister sitting in wheelchair]

SPEAKER: Order! I think the member has to indicate that she wants the call.

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Mr Speaker? [Minister raises hand]

SPEAKER: The Hon Carmel Sepuloni.

Hon CARMEL SEPULONI (Minister for Social Development): Last week, Accor Hotels, Tourism Industry Aotearoa, and the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) announced that they would be extending their Fast Track Partnership Programme to Christchurch this month. The programme currently operates in Rotorua and provides unemployed people with hospitality and industry training, and employment opportunities. The five weeks of pre-employment training offers a mix of classroom-based and hands-on training, as well as the opportunity to earn New Zealand Qualifications Authority level 3 qualifications. This is yet another example of how this Government is working with business to create better job opportunities for New Zealanders.

Priyanca Radhakrishnan: What feedback has she had on the success of the programme?

Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: The Fast Track Partnership Programme was established in 2017 when Tourism Industry Aotearoa came on board. Whilst the programme is still new, it is already showing promising results. Of those who took part in the first training, 90 percent got employment contracts as a result. Of the most recent cohort, 89 percent will start work this week in new careers in hotels across Rotorua. I'm looking forward to the programme's continuing success as it is rolled out in Christchurch.

Priyanca Radhakrishnan: Why are these programmes and partnerships so important?

Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Strong partnerships with industry leaders and employers are essential for developing training valued by employers, which leads to sustainable and meaningful work for MSD clients. Through MSD's broader partnerships with Accor Hotels, the Ministry of Social Development have placed more than 800 clients into employment across the country. Every day we are working with business to grow these opportunities, and I'm looking forward to seeing these expand in the future.

• Question No. 12—Broadcasting, Communications and Digital Media

12. MELISSA LEE (National) to the Minister of Broadcasting, Communications and Digital Media: Does she stand by all her statements and actions?

Hon CLARE CURRAN (Minister of Broadcasting, Communications and Digital Media): Yes, in their context.

Melissa Lee: Does she use a personal email account or accounts to conduct any official business?

Hon CLARE CURRAN: From time to time, I have used my Gmail account. When using it, I adhere to my obligations as a Minister.

Melissa Lee: What Government business has she conducted via her Gmail account?

Hon CLARE CURRAN: I just answered that: from time to time, I've used my Gmail account. And I've—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Sorry, sorry. Can members on my left be quiet, and I want the Minister to start her answer—

Hon CLARE CURRAN: Can the member repeat her question?

Melissa Lee: What Government business has she conducted via her Gmail account?

Hon CLARE CURRAN: To the best of my recollection, I haven't used my—I've answered Official Information Act (OIA) responses and personal and parliamentary questions correctly, and, to the best of my recollection, you know, that's what I've done.

Melissa Lee: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The question specifically asked what Government business the Minister has actually conducted using her Gmail.

SPEAKER: And I'm going to rule that the member, between the primary and the supplementary answer, certainly answered that to my satisfaction. I mean, I think all of us know that there's no restriction on members or Ministers using Gmail accounts. I think all of us know that a large amount of the foreign affairs business of the previous Government was carried out by Gmail.

Melissa Lee: What steps has she or her office undertaken to ensure any correspondence she receives in her Gmail in-box relating to her portfolio is recorded in accordance with official record-keeping practices?

Hon CLARE CURRAN: I worked with my office to ensure that I am responding appropriately to OIA requests and parliamentary questions.

SPEAKER: That's—I think the member will have another crack at that, because that didn't cover the entire question. The member might want to repeat the question, so the Minister understands it.

Melissa Lee: I will repeat the question, sir. What steps has she or her office undertaken to ensure any correspondence she receives in her Gmail in-box relating to her portfolio is recorded in accordance with official record-keeping practices?

Hon CLARE CURRAN: I have reviewed my processes with my office. I reassure that member that I've released information in accordance with the OIA.

Melissa Lee: Why did she state, "My staff have access to my email accounts and assess whether the correspondence falls under my ministerial portfolios." in the Minister's reply to written question No. 19442?

Hon CLARE CURRAN: Well, because they do.

Melissa Lee: How many email accounts has she used for ministerial business other than those listed on the Parliament, ministerial, Beehive, or Labour Party websites?

Hon CLARE CURRAN: As I said in answer to the first supplementary, from time to time I've used my Gmail account. When using it, I adhere to my obligations as a Minister

Melissa Lee: What discussions has she had with the coalition Government's former Minister for Government Digital Services about record-keeping practices?

Hon CLARE CURRAN: As I've said, I have reviewed processes in my office, including with the former Government digital services.

Melissa Lee: Supplementary—

SPEAKER: No, the National Party has run out of supplementary questions.

© Scoop Media