Sitting date: 17 December 2024

ORAL QUESTIONS

QUESTIONS TO MINISTERS

Question No. 1—Workplace Relations and Safety

1. LAURA McCLURE (ACT) to the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety: What recent announcements has she made in her workplace relations and safety portfolio?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety): This coalition Government has been working hard in the lead-up to Christmas and I'm pleased to share it has been a busy month for my workplace relations and safety portfolio. Over the past month, I've announced a high income threshold for unjustified dismissal personal grievances, the removal of remedies for personal grievances in cases where the employee contributed to the grievance, the reintroduction of wage deductions for partial strikes, I've asked my officials to develop an hours-based accrual system for annual leave, and today I announced the new minimum wage rate for 2025 in order to give businesses certainty leading into the new year. Together, these changes will help rebalance the employment relations landscape. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: Can you just stop for a minute. Now, that constant barrage across the House is not acceptable. Rare and reasonable was the deal. The Minister will continue.

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: Thank you. Together, these changes will help rebalance the employment relations landscape, make it easier to hire workers, and reduce compliance costs so that both workers and employers can focus on what they do best.

Laura McClure: How will your announced changes affect employers?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: I've met a lot of employers up and down the country, and I know that these changes will be welcomed by many. Dealing with vexatious personal grievances can be extremely stressful for employers, who can find themselves facing large and unanticipated costs. An employer's own wellbeing and reputation can be harmed throughout the grievance process, yet for employers there is no recourse. Reintroducing wage deductions for partial strikes will be particularly welcomed by employers with workers in customer-serving industries, where it is often the public that suffer as a consequence of partial strikes. And employers have welcomed the decision I've made to scrap the previous Government's approach to fixing the Holidays Act and pursue a much simpler and more workable path of an hours-based accrual to annual leave.

Laura McClure: So how will your announced changes affect workers?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: These changes recognise and reward the hard-working, aspirational Kiwis out there who are doing their best to make a good living for themselves and the people they care about. The changes to personal grievances will improve workplace culture and morale. Many workers will be able to recall a time they've had to work with a difficult—

SPEAKER: The Minister will just stop. I just spoke to the House about the constant barrage of interjections, none of which are reasonable, and they are certainly not rare. I point the House to Speaker's ruling 65/2 by Assistant Speaker Robertson and Speaker Wilson and suggest that that is the course that we're going to follow. The Minister can start the answer again.

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: These changes recognise and reward the hard-working, aspirational Kiwis out there who are doing their best to make a good living for themselves and the people they care about. The changes to personal grievances will improve workplace culture and morale. Many workers will be able to recall a time they've had to work with a difficult employee or manager. This change is for workers who find it galling that the worst behaviour or mediocre performance receives a financial payout. An hours-based accrual system for annual leave will reduce the risk of underpayment that has plagued the current Holidays Act, and the 1.5 percent increase to the minimum wage rate that I've announced today will make sure young people continue to have the opportunity to get their first job, enjoy their new-found sense of responsibility, and build those necessary life skills that will take them far in their career ahead.

SPEAKER: Yeah, order is helped by Ministers being concise in their answers.

Question No. 2—Prime Minister

2. Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his Government's statements and actions?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister): Yes, and especially our work to complete our latest quarterly action plan. In the last three months, we've completed 42 actions designed to lift New Zealand's economic performance, restore law and order, and improve the public services that all of us rely upon. This quarter, that included a massive package of changes to the Resource Management Act designed to unlock growth and investment by slashing red tape for farmers and the primary sector, unlocking regionally and nationally significant projects through fast track—it's still not too late for the other side to support it—and introducing fresh changes designed to unleash investment, housing, energy infrastructure, and farmers. This Government is working hard to make sure that we deliver for New Zealanders, and I want to say thank you to all my hard-working Ministers and the officials, who have been up all day and night making sure we unleash fast track on New Zealand. [Interruption]

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Supplementary question, Mr Speaker—

SPEAKER: No, just wait until your own side settles down. The Rt Hon Chris Hipkins.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: So who is correct, then: the Prime Minister, who says that his whole Government is relentlessly focused on his quarterly action plan, or his Deputy Prime Minister, who says—and I quote—"I don't have this sort of dashboard crap that I see other people perform on and a 50-point plan, or a 100-point plan, or a quarter-year plan", and if Winston Peters thinks that his plans are crap, why should Kiwis think otherwise?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I just want to say what a fantastic Deputy Prime Minister we have, because not only did he complete his two actions in the quarter four action plan—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: No, hang on. Wait on.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: —on the racing industry—

SPEAKER: Excuse me—

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: —and around knocking off—

SPEAKER: Prime Minister.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: —greyhounds; he did a brilliant job—

SPEAKER: Prime Minister.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Sorry.

SPEAKER: Reaction to something is fine, but keeping it on like that is not. Now, I'd invite you to start again, but I don't want that reaction again, so pick up where you left off, please, Prime Minister.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, as I was saying, the Deputy Prime Minister did an excellent job of completing his two actions of the 43 in the quarter four action plan, which were to help the racing industry get ahead, and also to make sure we deal with the greyhound industry, which he did very, very effectively and very, very well. And I think if you asked the Deputy Prime Minister, I think he was referencing his previous experience working with the last Government.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Why has his Government agreed to increase the fees paid to directors of Government companies by between 39 percent and 104 percent while increasing the minimum wage by less than the rate of inflation?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, if I take the last issue first, we have found a balance with a 1.5 percent increase to the minimum wage—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: No, sorry, this has got to stop or someone is leaving, or a number will be leaving. It's unbelievably bad. Prime Minister.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Thank you, Mr Speaker. As I would talk to minimum wage, we've proposed a 1.5 percent increase to the minimum wage. But this is also a Government that actually cares about low and middle income working New Zealanders. Unlike the other side, who failed to support tax relief for low and middle income workers, for the first time in 14 years this Government has delivered tax relief, inflation relief, and interest rate relief. Importantly, every quarter of this Government, wages have grown faster than prices, unlike the 13 quarters in a row under the previous administration. So we care about working New Zealanders, on this side. We're supporting them with FamilyBoost and supporting them with Working for Family credits and tax relief.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: So why—

SPEAKER: No, no—hang on. There's a lot of people on your own side talking while you're starting. Just wait until the House is quiet, and the House—

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. If the Prime Minister actually addressed the questions that were asked, rather than giving a long speech about things unrelated to the question, there might be less interjection on this side of the House.

SPEAKER: Well—

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Order in the House goes both ways, Mr Speaker. If you'd like order on this side, you might want to make sure that side is also complying with the rules. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: Just a moment.

Hon Shane Jones: Three strikes.

SPEAKER: Excuse me. The member might like to reflect on his own question: "Does he stand by all the Government's statements and actions?" That leads it open to anything and any answer from that point.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. That's a very new ruling; one that's not consistent with any—

SPEAKER: No, it's not a new ruling.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: —other Speakers' rulings in the past.

SPEAKER: It's not a new ruling.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: A supplementary question that is quite specific is still a specific supplementary question.

SPEAKER: Well, look, that might be the member's view, but I've heard Speakers—many Speakers—talk about the open nature of that particular question, which is a feature of today's question time: "Does he stand by all his Government's statements and actions?" That would assume that he can talk about anything that the Government has done: actions and statements.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Well, point of order, Mr Speaker.

SPEAKER: You're speaking to your point of order.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Yeah, a further point of order, Mr Speaker. If I place a more specific question to the Prime Minister at a future question time, will you ensure that it cannot be transferred to another Minister?

SPEAKER: Well, unfortunately, the Standing Orders allow the Government to do that. The member is welcome to have his representatives on the Standing Orders Committee raise that, along with the other six matters that the Standing Orders Committee is currently dealing with for matters that are of contention in the House.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Well, a new point of order, Mr Speaker. You may be aware that the Standing Orders Committee has previously discussed whether questions should be specifically allocated to the Prime Minister and there should be a set number of those, and it was the National Party that blocked that.

SPEAKER: Well, I'm sure that—

Hon Chris Bishop: That's not right—that's just not right.

SPEAKER: Excuse me! Thank you. The Leader of the House is not immune to the prospect of being asked to leave. Don't speak whilst points of order are being taken. I'm sure that the member will be aware of the convention—which, apparently, are very, very important here—that one Parliament is not bound by another. So I'm sure that if the member's people brought that to the Standing Orders Committee, it would get a fair hearing.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Why is it that under his Government, minimum wage workers have to tighten their belts with a real-terms pay cut while company directors get a 100 percent pay rise?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: As I said, we've talked about minimum wage workers. There's a 1.5 percent increase, along with income tax relief, along with FamilyBoost, along with Working for Families credits. With respect to professional directors that we're asking to run some of our largest entities, they are not paid market rates, they won't still be, but it's actually acknowledging that we want to attract good people to make sure we have high-quality governance. I'm sure the member would understand that, given the variety of messes that he left behind in the last Government. Good governance matters to deliver—to deliver—and get outcomes. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: I'll just make the point that that sort of response from the person answering the question does illicit a reaction, which I think is reasonable.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Why are minimum wage earners having their pay cut in real terms, despite the cost of living crisis, while their power bills keep going up and the directors of Transpower, who are increasing the charges all New Zealand consumers face, get a pay increase of over 56 percent?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I'd just point to that member and say that this is a Government that has, for four quarters in a row, seen wages rise faster than prices—total wages, right? So if you think about that under the previous administration, there were 13 quarters in a row where prices were greater than inflation. So real wages are increasing under this Government in our first 12 months. That's fantastic. You're in a situation where you see three rate cuts versus 12 rate rises—

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker, there were admittedly two parts to that question: one concerned minimum wage workers; the other concerned directors of Transpower. I didn't ask about average wages; I asked about minimum wage workers and the directors of Transpower. The Prime Minister hasn't addressed either of those questions.

SPEAKER: Well, the Prime Minister was cut off in the middle of the answer—although it was extremely long. What I would also suggest is that minimum wage is part of the average wage calculation. Prime Minister.

Hon David Seymour: Mr Speaker?

SPEAKER: The Prime Minister will finish the answer.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Thank you, Mr Speaker. As I've said, we want to make sure that we get professional directors that are closer to market rates, not at market rates, to make sure that we have good governance of significant Government entities that need to deliver. That's what we're focused on.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: If KiwiRail did such a lousy job of managing the Interislander, why has he agreed to giving its directors a 90 percent pay increase while minimum wage workers go backwards?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, again, I won't get into the specifics of decisions of the board of KiwiRail around CEO pay, but what I will say is that we are determined to improve the quality of governance of our Government entities across New Zealand. It's really important. So all we're doing is we're not going to full market rates; we're just finding a pathway to make sure that we can actually attract good people to come on and do those very important roles.

Hon David Seymour: Can the Prime Minister confirm that New Zealand's minimum wage at around 70 percent of the median wage is one of the highest in the developed world, and does he find it surprising that the Labour Party would like directors of public Government-owned companies to be paid a fraction of what private sector companies are paid?

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker, today, you've been very harsh on this side of the House in terms of our compliance with the Standing Orders. The minute David Seymour mentioned the Labour Party in his question, the question should have been ruled out of order. He has no responsibility for the Labour Party, and using a Government patsy question to attack the Opposition is completely out of order.

SPEAKER: You're quite right, and had it not been for the speed with which the member raced to his feet to take a point of order, I may well have ruled that way. I'm doing so now. Leave that out; finish the question.

Hon David Seymour: Could I start again from the beginning, Mr Speaker?

SPEAKER: Well, not if it's going to be the same question.

Hon David Seymour: It'll be a revised version.

SPEAKER: Well, a lot of revised versions cause trouble, but do your best.

Hon David Seymour: This'll be designed to cause as little trouble as possible.

SPEAKER: Yeah, good.

Hon David Seymour: Does the Prime Minister—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Hang on, he's asking a question.

Hon David Seymour: Does the Prime Minister wish to confirm that the minimum wage in New Zealand, at around 70 percent of the median wage, is among the very highest in the developed world, and does he believe it important that publicly owned companies have directors that are remunerated at a rate that is comparable and perhaps almost competitive with the rates paid to directors of privately owned companies so they can be productive and efficient for the public?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: In answer to both legs of that question, yes and yes.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Who's correct: Nicola Willis, who claims she has "delivered" new interisland ferries, despite not knowing who will build them, how much they'll cost, or who's going to pay for them; or Winston Peters, who said, "There are far more viable propositions that are yet to be considered."?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I am very proud of the value-for-money option that Nicola Willis has delivered, because it is a safe, reliable, resilient service that will be in operation in 2029: two rail-compatible ferries. But we have a new Minister for Rail, and given we've got time to make the ultimate procurement decision, if he can improve on that, good luck.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Good to see them working so well together!

SPEAKER: Question No—good, when everyone's ready.

Question No. 3—Finance

3. RYAN HAMILTON (National—Hamilton East) to the Minister of Finance: What recent announcements has she made on Government finances?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance): Earlier today, I released the Budget Policy Statement. At the same time, Treasury released its half-year update, which contains the latest set of forecasts. They tell a positive story about growth returning to the New Zealand economy, and they also highlight some challenges for the Government's books. Forecast provisions have made it more difficult to address the situation we inherited, a rapid increase in debt over the past five years, and an extended period of Budget deficits, but we are firmly committed to turning that around, and the books show we are headed in the right direction.

Ryan Hamilton: What does the Budget Policy Statement say about Budget 2025?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: The Budget Policy Statement sets four priorities for Budget 2025: (1) lifting economic growth through measures to address New Zealand's long-term productivity challenges; (2) implementing a social investment approach to drive better results from the Government's investment in social services and thereby improve life outcomes for people with high needs; (3) keeping tight control of Government spending while funding a limited number of high-priority Government policy commitments and cost pressures that cannot be met from reprioritisation; and (4) developing a sustainable pipeline of long-term infrastructure investment.

Ryan Hamilton: Why is improving productivity so important?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: The Government's focus is not just on the fiscals; we are also focused resolutely on growth, and that must come from productivity improvements, not just from working more. The Government has a busy programme but is collectively aimed at improving productivity, from resource management reforms to overseas investment, to gene technology, to fast-track consenting, to labour market regulation, to education, to infrastructure, and so on, and that has a loop back to the fiscals. Additional growth of even a quarter of a percent of nominal GDP each year would boost tax revenue by $2 billion a year by the end of the forecast period. That's a win-win.

Ryan Hamilton: What alternative advice has she received about fiscal strategy?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: I receive a lot of advice about fiscal strategy, much of it unsolicited. For example, I recently received a letter from 15 economists telling me to increase current and future Government spending. I noticed that several people who signed this letter telling me to spend more were advisers to the previous Minister of Finance, and two are currently on the Labour Party policy council. I wasn't surprised. I've also heard advice from a person saying that the Budget surplus is a moot point and that a future Government they could be finance Minister in would consider taking on more debt. This actually did surprise me, because it came from Barbara Edmonds.

Question No. 4—Prime Minister

4. RAWIRI WAITITI (Co-Leader—Te Pāti Māori) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his Government's statements and actions?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister): Yes, and especially today's announcement that we are taking further actions to keep Kiwis safe in emergency departments (EDs) this summer. If you visit, or work in, an ED, you deserve to feel safe. And over the holiday period, EDs can be particularly busy and stressful places. That's why we're building on last year's successful programme and ensuring more support is available to keep Kiwis safe: 20 hospitals will receive additional funding for security, and further funding will be available if there is a major incident or event that requires a greater security presence. Our Government's working hard at improving public services that all Kiwis can rely on, whether that's in the community or in an emergency department.

Rawiri Waititi: Will his Government's benefit sanctions help to put more kai on the table or less kai on the table this Christmas for the thousands of hungry tamariki in Aotearoa?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I'm very proud of the traffic light system that our great Minister from the Ministry of Social Development has implemented because what it means is a pretty simple requirement: show up and talk to your case manager; get a resume and show up to your job interviews.

Rawiri Waititi: Does he agree with the Child Poverty Action Group that his decision to put the wellbeing of landlords over the wellbeing of tamariki will put 20,000 more children into poverty by the time his term is up?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: What I'm proud about is under Budget '24, with all the cost of living measures that this Government delivered for low and middle income New Zealanders, 17,000 children are going to be taken out of poverty—compared to the last year of the Labour Government, where 23,000 more children were put in poverty.

Rawiri Waititi: What does he say to Logan, a 7-year-old tamaiti who wrote to Santa asking for a burger to share with his mum for Christmas?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I acknowledge that across New Zealand, it's a pretty tough time. That's what happens when you don't run an economy well. If you care about low and middle income New Zealanders, you run the books well. You don't spend more, tax more, borrow more, and deliver less.

Rawiri Waititi: If I sold three houses and earned $769,500 in untaxed capital gains, how many burgers can I buy for Logan and his mum?

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Point of order!

SPEAKER: Well, the point I'd make is that the Prime Minister cannot be expected to know the fluctuating price of burgers anywhere in the world, let alone New Zealand. The question is out of order.

Rawiri Waititi: Does he believe that "I earned that $769,500 through hard work" or did I benefit from the increased demand of housing driven by his mega-landlord donors?

SPEAKER: Now, that question's out of order too.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I do suggest that we're going to have to, some time between Christmas and New Year, do a familiarisation course for members of Parliament. That sort of question is outrageous in the extreme; it's hypothetical in the extreme and would not be accepted in any First World parliament, let alone this one here that's been going since 1854. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: Excuse me. Who's speaking during a point of order?

Rt Hon Winston Peters: The Marsden Point close-down merchant was speaking to me when I was talking.

SPEAKER: Was that helpful?

Hon Dr Megan Woods: What was that?

SPEAKER: In fact, I didn't hear it. I'm sorry. The point was that the question is out of order and I'd already ruled it out of order before the point of order.

Rawiri Waititi: Has he read the book by Mary McHugh, How Not to Become a Crotchety Old Man?

SPEAKER: Well, much as it might be of interest to the House to find out what the Prime Minister's personal reading materials are, I don't think it was necessary to give a demonstration of what the book was about.

Question No. 5—Finance

5. Hon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour—Mana) to the Minister of Finance: Does she stand by all her statements and actions?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance): In context, yes. I particularly stand by my statement to the effect that now more than ever is a time for disciplined Government spending and a focus on driving economic growth.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Isn't it the case that the last time net core Crown debt was this high, which will peak at 46.5 percent of GDP, was in 1994?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: It is also the case that in the past five years, the last Labour Government added more than $100 billion to New Zealand's debt. And we, as a Government, are now saddled with the task of bending that debt curve back—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Hold on! Just stop. Stop, thank you. You can't expect me to have any view on the quality of an answer if the noise is so loud it can't be heard. Now, that might be the intention, but it's not going to continue. Minister, begin answering the question—answer the question again from the start. I am going to make it clearly a point that it is not inappropriate to mention matters of policy conducted by a previous Government.

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: The context for New Zealand's debt position is that in recent years, more than a hundred billion dollars was added to debt, blowing it out as a proportion of GDP. It is the fiscal intention of this Government to see that debt curve curve down, and we have laid out a path to achieving it. I'd also note that the member opposite is the very same member who told Radio New Zealand she doesn't think debt is a problem.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Isn't it the case that net core Crown debt will now be 3.5 percentage points higher than what was forecast in her Budget?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: As I have set out today in the Budget Policy Statement, it is the case that forecast revisions to New Zealand's GDP trajectory will have an effect on debt. That is why it is so important that the Government maintain a disciplined fiscal position with lower operating allowances than have been the case in recent years when the last Government blew spending out as a proportion of GDP, leaving our economy in a very challenged state. If that member wants to join those on this side of the House in the pursuit of fiscal discipline, I can only welcome it.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Isn't it the case that there will be $58.7 billion more debt, peaking at $235 billion, than what was forecast in her Budget only six months ago?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: As I have laid out today in the Budget Policy Statement and as Treasury has laid out in the Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update, downward revisions to the fiscal forecasts have had an effect in two ways. One, the current recession is estimated to have started earlier and to be more protracted than had previously been forecast. And, two, there has been a downward revision to productivity forecasts. This does have an effect on debt. Now, this Government believes there is a place for debt, for borrowing for long-term infrastructure assets. We also believe it is very important to get debt down to a trajectory under 40 percent of GDP. Again, I note that if the member wishes to join us in that pursuit, that would be novel for her and her party—

SPEAKER: That's enough. That's enough—you've answered the question.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: She knows what she's doing. No wonder you warn her.

SPEAKER: Listen, it's very hard to listen to an answer when you've got a very, you know, resounding voice coming in one ear.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Do you want me to talk to her?

SPEAKER: If you wouldn't mind.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Will she take responsibility for the growth forecast being revised downwards since her Budget and predicted to be $20 billion smaller in 2028?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: I won't take responsibility for the mistakes of the last Government, but I will take responsibility for fixing it.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Does she plan on shifting any other goalposts to help reach her targets, like she has done with the definition of OBEGAL and with child poverty targets?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: I reject the characterisations of the member's question.

Question No. 6—RMA Reform

6. KATIE NIMON (National—Napier) to the Minister responsible for RMA Reform: What progress has been made in meeting the commitment in the Government's Quarter Four Action Plan to "Passing the Fast-track Approvals Bill to speed up delivery of regional and national projects of significance"?

Rawiri Waititi: By getting rid of the Treaty.

SPEAKER: Woah—just give him a minute.

Hon CHRIS BISHOP (Minister responsible for RMA Reform): Thank you very much. This afternoon, the Fast-track Approvals Bill will receive its third reading, fulfilling one of the actions in the Quarter Four Action Plan. The new system will be up and running in early February 2025, with listed projects able to apply directly to the Environmental Protection Authority for their substantive application process to begin. We've long said it takes too long and it is too hard to consent things in this country. This Government is getting on with the job of fixing that through fast-track.

Katie Nimon: What positive feedback has he received on the Fast-track Approvals Bill?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: It's been extraordinary going up and down the country. Anyone who's tried to get anything built in this country has been radicalised against our current consenting process. One constituent wrote to me to say, "The fast-track process is an excellent initiative for the right project. I agree it needs to be maintained." Another simply wrote, "Keep up the excellent work. Protesters are only a minority." And, of course, it was interesting in the House last week to see Labour Party MPs both vote against the fast-track but spend much of the committee stage debate lauding various projects listed in the bill, most notably the Hope Bypass project down in Nelson, which is, of course, a road of national significance and a Government priority—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Sit down!

Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: You're a tangiweto!

SPEAKER: The member knows that those proceedings should not be brought into the House at this particular time. And I'd say to the member on the end of the cross benches on the Opposition side that she needs to modify her contributions considerably in order to stay.

Katie Nimon: Does the Minister expect to see economic growth benefits from the Fast-track Approvals Bill?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Yes, we do. There's no doubt that the cost and time of consenting stifles economic growth: so much time and money spent on long costly processes. These 149 projects, the initial tranche, will help rebuild our struggling economy and kick-start growth around the country. If we want a brighter future for New Zealand, we have to stop giving in to a nimby, low-growth, status quo minority. We deserve a country with thriving infrastructure and world-class industry, where New Zealanders can live the lives they want to live without having to get sign-off from the local council for every single thing they do. Fast-track is about saying yes, when for too long we have said no.

Katie Nimon: Supplementary?

SPEAKER: And this will be a nice concise answer, I'm sure. Ask the question.

Katie Nimon: Why is economic growth so important?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Well, as members will have seen today, the Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update shows the Crown's financial position has deteriorated over the past six years, and I echo the views of the Minister of Finance, who has rightly noted that this reinforces the need to drive greater economic growth if we want better public services and more opportunities for young Kiwis. We are battling anaemic levels of economic growth. Our status as a first-world country is not guaranteed. We should not take it for granted. If we want to be a growing economy that provides the revenue and the world-class opportunities New Zealanders need, we need growth. Fast-track is a way to deliver that, and that's why this Government is backing it.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Can I ask the Minister as to whether he really thinks that he's given due credit to the Hon David Parker, who provided so much inspirational precedence for this legislation?

SPEAKER: That would be a question asking the Minister to reflect on what might be considered a personal failing, so we'll move on now to Question No. 7.

Question No. 7—Prime Minister

7. CHLÖE SWARBRICK (Co-Leader—Green) to the Prime Minister: E tautoko ana ia i ngā kōrero me ngā mahi katoa a tōna Kāwanatanga?

[Does he stand by all of his Government's statements and actions?]

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister): Yes.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does the Prime Minister think that it is the job of his Government to decrease wealth inequality?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Our Government's working incredibly hard to raise incomes, to provide economic growth, and to lower the cost of living.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Can the Prime Minister name one—just one—Government policy that will decrease inequality in this country?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: We have adjusted tax for low and middle income working New Zealanders. We have increased the Working for Families credits. We have also provided FamilyBoost for people dealing with expensive childcare. We have provided inflation, interest rate, rent stability, and also tax relief for low and middle income working New Zealanders.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does the Prime Minister believe that we have a fair tax system when the IRD told us all last year that the wealthiest 311 households in this country pay an effective tax rate less than half of that of the average New Zealander, and his Government has chosen to re-entrench those settings?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: It's well established by Treasury that, you've heard them say, we have a progressive tax system.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Did the Prime Minister also hear Treasury say that we would have a more productive economy if we were to implement a capital gains tax?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I can tell you that would not be the case. That would be a wrecking ball through our economy because we have been in recession for three years—

Chlöe Swarbrick: The IMF! The OECD!

SPEAKER: No, sorry. The member's just asked a question. If she keeps on yelling out across the House like that, she won't be asking any more questions for the rest of the day, let alone participating. Let the answer come to a question you've put so much time into asking.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Sorry, point of order, Mr Speaker. That was the first time that I heckled the Prime Minister, that I offered a response to what the Prime Minister was saying. Are you saying now, as a Speaker's ruling, that I am not allowed to respond in the course of an answer being provided by the Prime Minister?

SPEAKER: I'm saying that you can find it in Speaker's Rulings on page 65—and I think it's 2 or 3—that you cannot sit in your seat and yell at people; it's not how it works. Does the member have another question?

Chlöe Swarbrick: How tough have the choices been for this Government to knowingly make decisions to enable the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer in real terms?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I absolutely reject the characterisation of that question. This is a Government that has been working incredibly hard to make sure that we rebuild an economy that helps low and middle income New Zealanders get ahead. That is the failing of the last Labour-Greens Government.

Question No. 8—Health

8. TIM COSTLEY (National—Ōtaki) to the Minister of Health: What recent statements has the Government made on keeping emergency departments safe this summer?

Hon Dr SHANE RETI (Minister of Health): At Wellington hospital this morning I reconfirmed the Government's commitment to keeping staff and patients safe in emergency departments (EDs) this summer. We know that EDs can be particularly busy and stressful places during the holiday period. That is why our Government is again taking extra safety steps to ease this by building on last year's successful programme and our additional commitment in Budget 2024. Over the summer, Health New Zealand will increase security in 20 mostly provincial hospitals across the country and have further surge capacity available if additional security is needed. We want to ensure that our ED staff stay safe this summer.

Tim Costley: Why was it a priority for the Government to provide this uplift in emergency department security?

Hon Dr SHANE RETI: Violence or aggression against patients, visitors, and health workers won't be tolerated. Both staff and patients alike deserve to feel safe when they're working or visiting hospitals in their time of need. This initiative reinforces that. That is why we announced both fixed funding positions as well as a flexible funding package which allows Health New Zealand to surge security support across emergency departments when needed. This is particularly helpful during summer for the many events being held in regional and rural areas.

Tim Costley: What feedback has the Minister received on the importance of this initiative?

Hon Dr SHANE RETI: Since becoming the Minister of Health, I have travelled across the country, visiting both regional and rural hospitals to hear feedback from the front line. During these visits, both staff and patients have commented to me how important this initiative has been in ensuring that people feel safe when visiting or working in ED. That is why this initiative will provide 44 additional full-time security personnel across our eight high-priority EDs, a flexible funding package to surge security support when needed and further provisioning for 12 security trainers.

Tim Costley: What other initiatives has the Government undertaken to improve our emergency departments?

Hon Dr SHANE RETI: Last week, we provided an update on our five key health targets. After years of deterioration, ED wait times remained relatively the same as they were the year before, whilst seeing roughly 18,000 more people presenting to our EDs. This is a particularly impressive achievement given our hospitals were tackling some of the highest rates of respiratory illness in almost a decade. However, there is still more work to be done to continue driving improvements in our ED wait times. That's why we have introduced initiatives like new acute-flow operational standards, and invested in discharge and transit lounges. We are absolutely committed to improving health outcomes for all New Zealanders.

Question No. 9—Health

9. Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Labour) to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by his refusal to be interviewed on cuts to information technology in hospitals on the ground that it is an operational matter; if so, can he guarantee that hospital care and data will be safe?

Hon Dr SHANE RETI (Minister of Health): Yes. Health New Zealand is undergoing a reset process as a result of the troubled health reforms of previous years. Cost blowouts have meant that Health New Zealand needs to refocus on its core functions, which include providing the healthcare that New Zealanders need whilst living within its means. The health commissioner is leading this process with staff, with the aim of gathering feedback on proposals. It's important to note that no final decisions have been made. I've been reassured by the commissioner that the reset is being undertaken in a careful and considered way, and it remains my expectation that hospitals and data will continue to be safe.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Does he stand by his statement in the House that redundancies for vital support staff at Health New Zealand are an operational matter as well, and, if so, what does he say to clinicians who are being tied up in admin rather than providing care?

Hon Dr SHANE RETI: In response to the answer to the first arm of her question, yes, I stand by that statement.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Does he stand by his refusal to comment on the loss of face-to-face after-hours services in Porirua because it is an operational matter, and, if so, what does he say to community members who want to know if they'll get the care they need?

Hon Dr SHANE RETI: In response to the first arm of that question, yes, it is well known that where technical or detailed operational matters are concerned, it is an operational matter for Health New Zealand.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Why is he evading questions on the operational realities of how New Zealanders are cared for in our health system and the consequences that stem from his direction to cut $1.4 billion in health spending?

Hon Dr SHANE RETI: I reject the assertions in that question and would point to the fact that we are trying to turn around the reset from the botched two years of health reforms that member was a part of.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Does he stand by his commitment to lower wait times for surgeries, or are operations now operational too?

Hon Dr SHANE RETI: Yes, I do stand by that commitment to lower the wait times for surgeries.

Question No. 10—Local Government

10. TOM RUTHERFORD (National—Bay of Plenty) to the Minister of Local Government: What recent announcements has he made about getting councils back to basics?

Hon SIMEON BROWN (Minister of Local Government): Yesterday, the Prime Minister and I announced reforms to get councils back to basics to reduce pressure on rates, deliver core services, and modernise outdated rules to drive efficiency and cost savings. These measures include removing the four "well-beings" from the Local Government Act, benchmarking council performance to hold them accountable. Ratepayers deserve councils that focus on the basics, like fixing pipes, filling potholes, and delivering reliable services, rather than expensive nice-to-haves.

Tom Rutherford: Why is the Government removing the four "well-beings" from the Local Government Act?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: The evidence shows that when the four "well-beings" were in legislation, rates increased approximately 2 percent more per year. Removing them sends a clear signal that councils must prioritise roads, rubbish, and reliable infrastructure. Ratepayers simply cannot afford excessive spending on nice-to-have projects or duplication of roles with central government. By focusing on core responsibilities, councils will reduce unnecessary financial burdens on their communities.

Tom Rutherford: How will benchmarking improve council accountability?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Benchmarking is a crucial tool for improving transparency and accountability. The Department of Internal Affairs will publish an annual report on councils' performance, including key metrics such as rates, council debt, capital expenditure, balanced budgets, and road conditions. By providing ratepayers with clear information, these reports will empower communities to assess how well their councils are managing resources and delivering services in their local communities.

Tom Rutherford: When will the first benchmarking report on local councils be released?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Good news: the first benchmarking report on local councils will be released in the middle of 2025, ahead of the 2025 local elections. This report will give hard-working ratepayers and residents across the country clear information about their council's financial performance prior to going to the polls in October 2025.

Question No. 11—Prime Minister

• 11. LAN PHAM (Green) to the Prime Minister: E tautoko ana ia i ngā kōrero me ngā mahi katoa a tōna Kāwanatanga?
• [Does he stand by all of his Government's statements and actions?]

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister): Sorry, I missed the translation. Can you repeat the question? I missed the translation.

LAN PHAM (Green) to the Prime Minister: E tautoko ana ia i ngā kōrero me ngā mahi katoa a tōna Kāwanatanga?

[Does he stand by all of his Government's statements and actions?]

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister): Yes.

Lan Pham: Can the Prime Minister confirm that no level of environmental protection will remain for public conservation covenants, outstanding natural landscapes, or water conservation orders under the Fast-track Approvals Bill?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, that's not an accurate—I reject the characterisation of that question. But what I'd say to you is that I am incredibly proud of the fast-track legislation and I really hope it's not too late for the Green Party to get on board, because we really do want to have a 30 percent increase in renewable energy projects across this country, we do really want to build 55,000 more houses, and we want to build up 180 kilometres of new roads.

Lan Pham: What would he say to the public concerned that some of the 149 project applications that his Cabinet approved under the fast-track process were required to disclose their track record of prior compliance and enforcement actions against them, and didn't?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Again, I'm not getting into the details of individual projects; there's an expert panel process that will manage that. But what I would say to that member is that the New Zealand public are actually sick of how long it takes to get things built in this country. There is no justification to take 19 months to build a three- to four-bedroom home that's 50 percent more expensive than the same home in Australia.

Lan Pham: Supplementary.

SPEAKER: Just wait for a moment. OK.

Lan Pham: Did Cabinet consider whether the 149 applications contributed to regionally and nationally significant infrastructure; and, if so, what was the rationale for including projects that didn't even bother answering how they supported regional or nationally significant infrastructure?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Again, we have a process where projects will go through an expert panel. But what I'd say is these are projects of national and regional significance, and we make no apologies for making sure that we prioritise economic growth after three years of being in a recession, thanks to a Labour-Greens Government.

Lan Pham: Will he commit to reconsidering projects included in the Fast-track Approvals Bill if the Auditor-General inquiry into Cabinet's handling of conflicts of interest finds the process was not managed appropriately?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: A hypothetical question—I'm not answering it.

Lan Pham: Where does localism fit, when his Government won't give local councils the decency of a response in even acknowledging their opposition to the fast-track projects in their city, district, or region, when even their democratic plans will soon have no weight in protecting their communities and their environment?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: There is a way, through the expert panels, for them to make a contribution. But, again, this is a Government that is making no apologies for getting things built quicker, prioritising economic growth, and making sure we get things done. That is what this country needs and I can tell you people are excited about fast track coming to a town near them shortly.

Question No. 12—Rail

12. TANGI UTIKERE (Labour—Palmerston North) to the Minister for Rail: Does he stand by his statement regarding any new Cook Strait ferries that "Rail-enabled ferries is part of our considerations, yes, and that is a no-brainer"; if so, will he guarantee that the new ferries will be rail-enabled?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Minister for Rail): Can I say to that member: I'd have thought this is far more important to be a question No. 12 today, but we get on with the answer. Nothing has been ruled in or out. We are looking at all the options—the costs and benefits, and the pluses and minuses—and we'll make decisions based on the best interests of our country. We are not going to make silly pledges before the work is done, and we can guarantee the member that we are not going to be asleep at the wheel like his colleagues were for the last three years.

Tangi Utikere: Was the Government advised that work on a new Picton wharf needed to begin this year, and, if so, what impact will any wharf and linkspan upgrades in Picton have on the ongoing operation of the rail-enabled Aratere ferry?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Well, it's not a secret to anyone apart from that side of the House that the port of Picton needs to be rebuilt in the next few years regardless, and we're going to be looking at those plans as we find out from the experts what it might entail.

Tangi Utikere: Was the Government advised that the rail-enabled Aratere would need to be retired in 2025?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Reality is that that was a scenario painted by the now disbanded ministerial advisory group, and the reality is that the decisions have not been taken by the Cabinet on that matter.

Tangi Utikere: Can he then guarantee that the Interislander's sole rail-enabled ferry, the Aratere, will be scheduled to continue operations until 2029?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: What I can guarantee is that, having had a meeting early this morning with KiwiRail and MUNZ—that's the Maritime Union—at midday, and we're going to consult with everybody, and we're going to find out exactly what's going on and what went wrong. And then we'll come to this House and declare transparently—

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Don't you know?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: No, no, we don't go off the top of our head like the previous Government. We get the information and we don't go from $401 million—which is what I charged them with in May 2020—to now, according to Treasury, $4 billion. That's inexcusable.

Tangi Utikere: Was the Government advised that the cheapest and most basic option for new Cook Strait ferries came in at $282 million each, which for two ferries would add up to more than the rail-enabled ferries contracted under iReX?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: What's amazing about that question is this: that we were talking about two ferries and we ended up with $4 billion on the account and no one over there is being responsible. We'll make one promise over here: we'll come in far, far, far less than that.

Tangi Utikere: Why did Nicola Willis miss the deadline for making a decision on ferries at the end of July this year, as recommended by her ministerial advisory group?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Actually, ministerial advisory groups don't set deadlines for this Government. We're not run by the bureaucracy; we run the thing from Cabinet. And the Minister that you're talking about, the finance Minister, had a nightmare on her hands and I'm deeply sympathetic with her predicament.

© Scoop Media