QUESTIONS TO MINISTERS

Question No. 1—Health

1. HŪHANA LYNDON (Green) to the Associate Minister of Health: Does she stand by her statement that "Nicotine is incredibly addictive"; if so, what evidence-based actions, if any, has she taken to support people to quit nicotine?

Hon CASEY COSTELLO (Associate Minister of Health): Nicotine is incredibly addictive; there's not a single person in this House who would dispute that. Unfortunately, yet again, the members opposite continue to conflate two different issues, so I will try again to clarify. Smoking kills. It harms nearly every organ of the body, causing cancer, heart disease, stroke, lung disease—the list goes on. But let's be clear. Nicotine is what keeps people smoking; it is not what makes it deadly. That's why this Government is focused on supporting smokers to manage their addiction to nicotine by accessing lower-harm nicotine products as alternatives to cigarettes. This has been standard practice for a considerable period of time. Once smokers have successfully quit, stop smoking services are able to support individuals to shift their focus to quitting vaping.

Hūhana Lyndon: Why is her Government funding RELX vapes as smoking cessation devices when unlike all other smoking cessation tools, they have not been approved by Medsafe and have not been through a robust procurement process?

Hon CASEY COSTELLO: The procurement process has been complied with. The product is completely compliant and safe. It is supplied by a company with no affiliations to the tobacco industry and it is a completely compliant product and is New Zealand - owned. The issue that we are talking about is that this product is being funded by the innovation fund as a tool to apply to alternative products that will help smokers quit smoking. It is only provided through quit smoking services and only to adult smokers and only to those who have committed to a programme of quitting smoking.

Hūhana Lyndon: Does she acknowledge that RELX determined an unusually high nicotine content for these vapes compared to approved smoking cessation tools, making them more addictive, and therefore maximising RELX's financial gain?

Hon CASEY COSTELLO: Yet again we are conflating the issues. We are talking about a product that is less harmful than smoking and therefore will allow long-term addicted smokers to quit smoking.

Hūhana Lyndon: What is her response to leaked recordings of RELX employees stating, "We've made effing bribes in New Zealand and Australia." and "That's the thing, right? Especially in difficult markets or markets with heavy strict regulations, all you have to do to circumnavigate them is to go into the grey channels."?

Hon CASEY COSTELLO: Mr Speaker, could she repeat the question? I'm not sure what the question was.

Hūhana Lyndon: What is your response to the quote? [Interruption]

SPEAKER: We'll hear the question again in silence, but I think that some care needs to be taken over the question.

Hūhana Lyndon: What is her response to the leaked recordings of RELX employees stating, "We've made effing bribes in New Zealand and Australia." and "That's the thing, right? Especially in difficult markets or markets with heavy strict regulations, all you have to do to circumnavigate them is to go into the grey channels."?

Hon CASEY COSTELLO: My response to that summation of quotes is the fact that she's missed out the section where the people in the recording are saying "No, no, no. That's not what we do." and also that this is a 2023 recording in Singapore, which has no connection to New Zealand markets or New Zealanders.

Hūhana Lyndon: What is her response to leaked recordings of—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Hang on. Wait on.

Hūhana Lyndon: What is her response to leaked recordings of RELX employees stating, "I'm talking about making, like, Government payments." and in response, "We don't do that visibly in Australia and New Zealand, but Government payments are not a problem for us because these are extremely—how do I put it—subtle."?

Hon CASEY COSTELLO: The inference that this New Zealand Government has received bribes is abhorrent and I reject the premise of that question.

Hūhana Lyndon: Will she ensure the procurement process for RELX vapes undergoes independent investigation in light of these comments from RELX employees, and if not, how will she address the concerns from New Zealanders about the procurement of these devices?

Hon CASEY COSTELLO: I have met with officials today. I'm confident in the procurement processes. We have produced a product that will allow smokers to quit smoking and we stand by that programme of work.

Question No. 2—Customs

2. JENNY MARCROFT (NZ First) to the Minister of Customs: What updates can she provide about the New Zealand Customs Service's efforts to improve services using technology?

Hon CASEY COSTELLO (Minister of Customs): I am pleased to announce that the New Zealand Customs Service, who are an exemplary Government department, recently announced that more travellers are now using the digital traveller declaration than the paper version. Everyone entering New Zealand must complete a declaration, and Customs and its border partners have worked tirelessly to encourage Kiwis and overseas visitors to use the declaration, which can be done 24 hours in advance of travel, rather than onboard a flight, and makes it easy to fill out multiple declarations before getting off a plane. Downloading the New Zealand Traveller Declaration app has additional benefits for families and frequent travellers. The digital declaration delivers better public services by supporting efficient processing by border agencies, and streamlining passengers' experience entering New Zealand. I would encourage everyone to give the digital declaration a go the next time they return to New Zealand.

Jenny Marcroft: What other technology improvements are delivering better services for passengers arriving to or departing New Zealand?

Hon CASEY COSTELLO: From September last year, e-passport holders from all 27 EU member States became able to use e-gates on arrival to and departure from New Zealand. This expansion means that travellers from 37 countries have access to automatic border processing in New Zealand. This represents over 85 percent of all arriving and departing travellers. I'm also advised that Customs is finalising plans to progressively open e-gates' access to remaining visa-waiver countries. Seamless and efficient border processing not only improves traveller experiences, it also frees up front-line customer staff to increase their focus on critical tasks, like assessing high-risk travellers.

Jenny Marcroft: Are technology improvements also supporting New Zealand businesses?

Hon CASEY COSTELLO: In the environment of saying "yes" and importing and committing to economic growth, Customs has made significant progress in making it easier for businesses to spend less time on paperwork, and more time focused on their business. Last year, Customs launched the alcohol Excise Duty Estimator on its website, and updated duty alcohol application forms and permits. Both of these updates aim to support businesses to make excise-related information easier to understand and more readily available. In addition, the launch of the MyCustoms account platform in June last year delivered improved accessibility, with deferred payment account holders given the ability to view their balance and transactions, download statements, and immediately access the information that they need online. Customs' deferred payments scheme allows importers to defer payments on their Customs' charges, consolidating them into a monthly invoice. This frees up cash flow, and means low-risk imports can move across the border faster. I'm advised that further options for online services are being developed, with the aim of being rolled out for clients later this year.

SPEAKER: That answer was excessively long. So I'm sure the next one will compensate.

Jenny Marcroft: What feedback related to technology improvements has been received by Customs that she's aware of?

Hon CASEY COSTELLO: I've been advised that the digital advances made by Customs are being positively received and providing improved efficiencies for both Customs' operational needs, as well as public using their services. Further stakeholders that Customs work with, such as airlines and fast freight and Custom brokers, are all enthusiastic about the agency's development of digital services.

Question No. 3—Prime Minister

3. Hon CARMEL SEPULONI (Deputy Leader—Labour) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his Government's statements and actions?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Deputy Prime Minister) on behalf of the Prime Minister: Yes.

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Why did the Government approve the purchase of $575,000 worth of vaping products from RELX, a company accused of bribing the New Zealand Government?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: As that member was just told, the date of that so-called phone call was to a Government that she was a member of with the help of the Greens in 2023. So any implication of a bribery comes straight back to her own back door. Now, having dismissed that because I don't believe it did happen in that way—I think it's a typical Green fiction—the reality is that the product works and all evidence says so. It says so in other countries, and we're in the first three in the world in reducing cigarette smoking and we should salute that because we're ahead of our target now.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Thank you, Mr Speaker. I think it is important, as I've raised a number of times, that when the Deputy Prime Minister is answering on behalf of the Prime Minister, he makes that clear. It makes it difficult for the Opposition subsequently to hold the Prime Minister to account on comments that were made on his behalf when it's so easily dismissed as "I didn't say that." There is a requirement in Speakers' rulings that Ministers answering on behalf of others make that clear before they answer.

SPEAKER: Thank you. Another supplementary?

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Can he confirm whether any Minister or official was aware of the bribery allegations against RELX before the procurement of these vaping products?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: We most definitely cannot confirm that because we weren't in Government at the time; she was.

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Was a formal tender process followed for selecting a vaping supplier at Health New Zealand?

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Could you say that again?

SPEAKER: Ask the question again.

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Was a formal tender process followed for selecting a vaping supplier at Health New Zealand?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The Minister in charge has had a review today and she's given that answer to a prior question in this House already.

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Does he believe it is appropriate for Health New Zealand to use taxpayer money to purchase products from a company with a documented history of regulatory breaches?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Well, again, if that is the case, then that Minister and her colleagues owe us an explanation as to how they began the process in the first place.

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Can he confirm whether any Minister, official, or Government agency has had undisclosed meetings, correspondence, or lobbying interactions with RELX or it's representatives?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: I have to tell that member that many of us on this side have never heard of that company before today, and for such an inquiry to be answered we would need to have it on notice so we can go and find out and give you an honest answer in this House. Bear this in mind, though, that the survey that began this process was done when she was in Government in 2021, and it said that the evidence says that smoking goes down as the less harmful vaping goes up. She got that information and she was acting on it then. Why the change in policy from the Opposition now?

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Can the Prime Minister rule out that any Government officials, Ministers, or parties in this Government received direct or indirect benefits from RELX or its affiliates in relation to that purchase; if not, why not?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: I am very grateful, as it turns out, for the Greens' disclosure today, because the year 2023 says that everything about this question relates to their time in office. So we can't account just for our side without finding out about her side. So perhaps we can come back next week and answer the question, having made full inquiries of the Labour Party and the Green Party.

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Does he have confidence in Associate Minister of Health Casey Costello's handling of this procurement process, given the lack of transparency and due diligence?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Sometimes, you know, you can give an answer; you take a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. The answer is profoundly in her own court. This began in 2023 when they were responsible. They started the process and all of a sudden, now, all sorts of allegations are falsely made and probably taken up by a very compliant media as part and parcel of the future history of this matter, but none of it will be true. Yes, I do have confidence in the Minister, total confidence in the Minister, because she's got an impeccable record on matters like that as a former policewoman.

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Will he commit to an independent public inquiry into the influence of the tobacco and vaping industry on its smoke-free policies; if not, why not?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: I'd barely be able to explain why they're going to have an inquiry when the tobacco companies are screaming blue murder that they're being treated unfairly. Can't that member get through her head what's actually happened here? You've got the insinuation, and the facts are a thousand miles away from them.

Question No. 4—Transport

4. MIKE BUTTERICK (National—Wairarapa) to the Minister of Transport: What reaction has he seen to the announcement yesterday that the previous Government's speed limit reductions are being reversed by 1 July 2025?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP (Minister of Transport): There's been a fantastic response due to yesterday's announcement around the reversal of the untargeted blanket speed limit reductions. For example, Transporting New Zealand saying they are "pleased to see the programme of speed limit reversals getting underway" and "changes will reduce journey times and help avoid dangerous behaviour by frustrated drivers." It was good to see that Masterton Mayor Gary Caffell, His Worship, told Morning Report "the three-minute saving journey [time] meant a lot for transport firms, ambulances and emergency services like the fire brigade."

Mike Butterick: What feedback has he seen regarding the economic growth potential of this announcement?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Well, we are very focused in this Government on speeding up economic growth and these measures will make a difference. Time savings make a difference across the country when it comes to making it easier to get from A to B. Transporting New Zealand said their members have been frustrated by blanket speed restrictions; the impact of increased journey times and increased freight costs were not adequately considered. New Zealand Couriers said that speed limits are an issue for couriers. The answer to unlocking growth in this economy is not one silver bullet policy, it's hundreds of different actions like this one taken across Government to speed New Zealand's economy up.

Mike Butterick: Has he seen any feedback from Wairarapa locals about the speed limit reversal on State Highway 2?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: It was interesting on Wednesday, in Featherston, we stopped in for a quick cup of coffee on the way back over the hill, to a claim from locals about the reversal of State Highway 2. I quote Pat Fairhall who told media he travels in it a lot, "the previous reduction … had made the journey very slow, … with a central barrier in place, it was possible to drive safely at higher speeds." Angus Stokes, in Wairarapa, said "it was a good change. It'll help speed things up with traffic and stuff like that". The Mayor of South Wairarapa "about time"—very concise and very correct. And I have seen the views of another Wairarapa resident, who told media yesterday he was pleased to see the speed limits go up and had, in fact, tried himself to get the limits changed and he was very annoyed at the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA). But a change of Government has put that situation right and I'm pleased to make sure that Kieran McAnulty's day was made on Wednesday.

Hon Dr Duncan Webb: Point of order. That was—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Let me just call you, for a start. Point of order, Duncan Webb—to be heard in silence.

Hon Dr Duncan Webb: I did pause because I was hoping you'd intervene, but that was a wholly gratuitous attack on a member, using a patsy question.

SPEAKER: One of the things that's been very interesting in the last few days is the heightened sensitivity that some people have to various—

Hon Member: That's right.

SPEAKER: Excuse me—comments that have been made in the House. I've looked through Standing Orders, I've looked through the Speaker's rulings, I've found ten that could touch on this, but none of them anticipate the degree of sensitivity that appears to be there at the present time. So I will be inviting the Standing Orders Committee to look at that in due course, but I think it's very hard to say that if someone stands to congratulate another member on something they've said, that somehow that's having a go at them. The public simply would not understand that. I think it also makes this Parliament less than the place of free speech and expression that it should be. Thank you for your concern, but we'll move on.

Mike Butterick: What are the next steps in the reversal of the last Government's blanket speed limit reductions?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: The Land Transport Rule: Setting of Speed Limits 2024 requires NZTA and councils to reverse the speed limits lowered since January 2020 on several categories of road by 1 July 2025. Thirty-eight speed limits on State highways are being reversed to their previous higher speed limit and there's further consultation on a further 49. I encourage New Zealanders participate in this consultation.

Question No. 5—Internal Affairs

5. LAURA McCLURE (ACT) to the Minister of Internal Affairs: What recent reports has she seen about the processing of citizenship applications?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs): The Department of Internal Affairs processed 54 percent more citizenship applications in December 2024 than were completed in December the year prior: 5,661 individual citizenship applications were completed last month—more than any other month in 2024. I have asked the department to focus on improving outcomes for new New Zealanders and I'm pleased to see progress being made.

Laura McClure: What does this mean for the backlog of citizenship applications?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: The number of work-in-progress applications is consistently decreasing, from 28,544 when I took office in November 2023, to 18,749 as of last month—a drop of 34 percent. The oldest applications being picked up for processing are now from late March 2024.

Laura McClure: How has this improvement been made?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: Increasing the efficiency of the Department of Internal Affairs and improving the delivery of core services is one of my key priorities as Minister. The department has been working to cross-skill their staff across citizenship, passport, and digital identity or RealMe applications to better respond to the fluctuations in demand.

Laura McClure: What communication have you had from the public about citizenship wait times?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: I have heard from many people who are applying for citizenship about the impact that long wait times have on them and their families. I know this can be tough on those who have lived and worked in New Zealand for many years and want to take that next step of becoming a New Zealand citizen. I'm pleased to see progress in reducing the backlog of citizenship applications, and I will remain focused on improving outcomes in this area. Congratulations to all new New Zealanders.

Question No. 6—Finance

6. Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour—Wigram) to the Minister of Finance: When did she ask for advice on the purpose and performance of State-owned enterprises, and what does she intend to do with any assets she deems to be underperforming?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP (Associate Minister of Finance) on behalf of the Minister of Finance: Ministers in this Government regularly seek information on the performance of Government entities. This is so we can drive better performance, meaning better services for New Zealanders and, potentially, higher dividends. When the Government took office in November 2023, Treasury proactively advised in its briefing to incoming shareholding and responsible Ministers (BIM) that Ministers should consider being clearer about the purpose of the Crown's ownership of several Government-owned companies. Treasury noted that "OECD guidelines recommend that countries also set out an 'ownership policy statement', and many OECD countries do so,". That BIM has been released publicly. Shareholding Ministers accepted Treasury's suggestion and agreed to receive advice on the issue. In answer to the second part of the question, if an entity is underperforming, then Ministers would look to improve its performance.

Hon Dr Megan Woods: Did she inform the wider Cabinet that she had initiated this work?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: We don't talk about what happens in Cabinet, but it is certainly true that other Ministers in addition to the Minister of Finance, such as the Minister for State Owned Enterprises (Minister for SOEs) and other Associate Ministers of Finance, have been, in some cases, receiving advice on that.

Hon Dr Megan Woods: Were all her Associate Ministers of Finance receiving this advice?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: On behalf of the Minister of Finance, I couldn't honestly give the member an answer that I was sure was accurate, because I'm not the Minister of Finance. But on behalf of the Minister, what I can say is that the Minister for SOEs has received advice, alongside the Minister of Finance, because in most cases the Minister for SOEs is a shareholding Minister in some Government companies—as the member will know from her own time—and Associate Ministers of Finance have received papers.

Hon Dr Megan Woods: Does she agree with Treasury, which said yesterday that Crown entities account for half the Government's deficit, and does she consider the sale of those entities could improve the deficit?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Well, it is definitely true to say that improving the performance of Crown entities would make a material difference to the Government books, and that is one of the reasons why Ministers have agreed to receive advice, as advised by the Treasury, on ownership policy statements. In relation to Crown entities and the Crown books, ACC, for example, is a large driver. However, it is not Government policy to sell ACC. It is Government policy to improve its performance.

Hon Dr Megan Woods: Does the contribution to the deficit play a role in her consideration of whether the Government is doing a good job in managing them?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: No. What drives the Government's interest is improving the financial situation of the country and improving the living standards for all New Zealanders. The Crown owns a significant number of assets and companies. Ministers are keen to drive improved financial performance of those companies and those assets. That is one of the reasons why Ministers have received advice on ownership policy statements, and I note that those countries well-known as Friedmanite, monetarist bastions like France, Germany, Korea, Norway, and Sweden have ownership policy statements for their Government assets.

Hon Dr Megan Woods: Does she consider it is good value for money to run down State assets, sell them to the private sector, and then repurchase them at a later date at an inflated price?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Well, there are about three or four hypothetical statements within that, and none of those things are Government policy.

Question No. 7—Māori Crown Relations: Te Arawhiti

7. HANA-RAWHITI MAIPI-CLARKE (Te Pāti Māori —Hauraki-Waikato) to the Minister for Māori Crown Relations: Te Arawhiti: Does he agree with the Prime Minister that Crown-Māori relations are "probably worse" under the coalition Government?

Hon TAMA POTAKA (Minister for Māori Crown Relations: Te Arawhiti): I te ao, i te pō, e tika ana te kōrero a te Pirīmia. Tēnei āhuatanga, te Kāwanatanga, pērā i ngā pāti o tēnei Whare me ngā mema Pāremata: he wā ka tae mai, he wā ka hoki ki te kāinga. Engari me toitū te Tiriti ki te āke āke.

Tēnei āhuatanga, te hononga i waenganui i te Karauna me ngā iwi Māori, ngā hapū Māori, he wā ka piki, he wā ka heke. I ēnei rā tata nei, kua kite hoki i te pāheketanga e pā ana ki te pire mātāpono Tiriti, engari ā te rā nei ka kitea hoki tōna whakarewanga i ngā mahi e pā ana ki Te Pire Whakatupua, arā tae atu ki te whakahoutanga o te Māori Purposes Bill.

[At all times the Prime Minister's statements are true. This characteristic of the Government, similar to the parties of this House and the Members of Parliament: there is a time to come here, and a time to go home. But the Treaty must remain for ever and ever.

This characteristic, the relationship between the Crown and the Māori peoples, the hapū of the Māori, there is time when it rise and time that it falls. In recent days, a slide has been observed related to the Treaty principles bill, but today its rise will be seen with the actions related to the Taranaki Maunga Collective Redress Bill—i.e., including the amendment of the Māori Purposes Bill.]

Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke: Does he agree with his statement that "te iwi Māori and Te Tiriti are fundamental to the country's past, present, and future"; if so, why is he supporting the regulatory standards bill, which would limit the role of Te Tiriti o Waitangi in future legislation?

Hon TAMA POTAKA: Ae, e tino tautoko ana au i tāku kōrero ai, me te mea nei, tāria te wā ka rongo hoki ki ngā kōrero a te Pirīmia; tāria te wā, mō tērā pire, ka kitea hoki tōna whakatinanatanga.

[Yes, I absolutely support what I said, and, similarly, in time we will hear the statements of the Prime Minister; in time, with respect to that bill, we will see its enactment.]

Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke: Did he advocate for the inclusion of Māori issues in the Prime Minister's statement, considering that the Prime Minister has admitted what the Māori-Crown relationship is worth under his Government?

Hon TAMA POTAKA: The content of the Prime Minister's speeches is for the Prime Minister, not for Tama Potaka.

Question No. 8—Housing

8. Hon KIERAN McANULTY (Labour) to the Associate Minister of Housing: Does he stand by his answer to oral question No. 9 yesterday that "those people who have a genuine need for a short-term stay in temporary accommodation known as emergency housing have a pathway to do that"; if not, why not?

Hon TAMA POTAKA (Associate Minister of Housing): Ki te arero o ōku tūpuna, āna, i te nuinga o ngā tāone o Aotearoa.

[In the language of my ancestors, yes, in the majority of the towns and cities of Aotearoa].

Hon Kieran McAnulty: How does he reconcile that with numerous front-line providers telling him at the Community Housing Aotearoa Conference 2024 that the policy changes he brought in are stopping those with genuine need getting into emergency housing?

Hon TAMA POTAKA: We have been very clear about the process through which the assessment of genuine need is undertaken, and we're very confident that the officials are undertaking that process in a pono and tika manner.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: How does the young mother and her four-month-old in Tauranga, who was told she can't apply for emergency housing and is now living in a tent, not have genuine need?

Hon TAMA POTAKA: In relation to that particular example, without further information, it's very hard to respond fully, and I'm sure that is a matter that should be dealt with at an operational end, and I encourage that to be followed up.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: How does the man in Christchurch who was discharged from hospital, denied emergency housing, and readmitted to hospital after complications from sleeping in his car not have genuine need?

Hon TAMA POTAKA: Again, that's a very specific example, and without further context, it's very difficult to respond to that. But those with genuine need for short-term stay in temporary accommodation in most cities and towns have a pathway to do that. And with that, as this House knows, as this House understands, there is a responsibilities framework in place. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: Sorry—stop, Minister. Let me make it very clear that the complaints that have been around about various comments made in the House have all come from interjections across the House and then responses to them. Interjections should be rare and reasonable. It's the one thing Standing Orders and Speakers' rulings are quite firm on, and so I'm reaffirming that. Please refrain from the sort of barrage that was coming from one sector of the Opposition during that last question.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: How do the mother and her children in the Wellington region, who, despite having fled domestic violence, are now sleeping rough and were still prevented from applying for emergency housing, not have genuine need?

Hon TAMA POTAKA: Again, what I want to reiterate is that there are a lot of New Zealanders doing it really tough, particularly with the cost of living and the economic recession that we've inherited. But our teams and our officials will continue to work very hard and closely with people in difficult situations to ensure that they have the appropriate support, whether or not that's in emergency housing or transitional housing or elsewhere. [Interruption]

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Supplementary.

SPEAKER: Yep, but I just want to state again that I'm not going to listen to that sort of general attempt to drown out anybody answering a question. Questions are asked in silence. They should be listened to respectfully.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Thank you, sir. How many examples will it take for the Minister to admit that there are fewer people in emergency housing, not because the need has reduced but because he has stopped those in genuine need accessing emergency housing?

Hon TAMA POTAKA: As we are all aware, we are very proud of the steps that we've taken to ensure that there's a reduction in the numbers of people living in emergency housing from over 7,000—7,000—people in December 2023 to 1,131 at the end of December 2024. Now, we understand that there are some people doing it very tough, and we have ensured that there is a reset to deliver better public services and emergency housing. Those examples that the member has given—we encourage him to work with those people to encourage them to work with our officials to ensure the appropriate support.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: They tried. You shut them out. What a disgrace. You should be ashamed, Tama—absolutely ashamed. They're on the street, man.

SPEAKER: Excuse me. You might be wanting to say those things, and you're entitled to say them, but at the right time and in the right context. I would ask, once again, that people refrain from what effectively is a form of heckling. I've been very liberal on it. But quite clearly the reaction to the last two days means that that can no longer continue. So I'm just giving fair warning that that sort of response is not going to be permitted moving forward.

Question No. 9—Social Development and Employment

9. SUZE REDMAYNE (National—Rangitīkei) to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What reports has she seen on employment in New Zealand?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Social Development and Employment): Stats NZ's monthly employment indicator released this week showed the number of filled jobs increased on a seasonally adjusted basis in December. This was the second month in a row of job growth, with more than 7,000 jobs added to the New Zealand economy during November and December. And it was encouraging to see the jobs picking up again were in areas linked to international tourism, such as transport, hospitality, and recreational services. This followed the Ministry of Social Development's (MSD) latest quarterly benefit stats, which shows more than 33,000 people cancelled their jobseeker benefit because they found work in the second half of 2024, which is a 22 percent increase on the same six months in 2023.

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: How many more people on benefit is the question!

SPEAKER: When the House is quiet, the question can be asked.

Suze Redmayne: What does the Government take from these numbers?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: While it's a difficult time for those who are looking for work, we are cautiously optimistic that the labour market is on the verge of a revival, following years of low growth and rising unemployment that began in 2022. It is encouraging that our unemployment rate is sitting around the OECD average, at about 5 percent. It is clear that New Zealanders are still feeling the effects of years of wasteful Government spending that fuelled high interest rates, but they can take comfort that our Government's efforts to grow the economy, create more jobs, and reduce the number of people relying on jobseeker benefits is having a positive impact.

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: More people on benefit; more people leaving the country.

SPEAKER: We're waiting for the member to be quiet.

Suze Redmayne: Why is reducing the number of people on jobseeker benefits important?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: Because our Government understands that we cannot afford to have 12 percent of our working-age population relying on welfare. If we want to live in a country with rising incomes and more job opportunities, we need to get back to valuing work and self-responsibility. Under the last Government, the forecast for how long someone under the age of 25 would be on a benefit over their life time blew out to more than 20 years. If we don't act now, too many of our children will spend the bulk of their working lives on welfare, while the rest grow up contributing more and more of their earnings to support them.

SPEAKER: Question No. 10—Kahurangi Carter

Suze Redmayne: Supplementary?

SPEAKER: Well, you've got to be fast out of the blocks, but OK, I'll allow it, but we'll get a short answer, I hope, because the last one was quite long.

Suze Redmayne: What are the Government's plans to support more people on welfare into work?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: Our Welfare that Works reforms have already reset the benefit system, putting a greater focus on accountability and supporting people with the steps they need. This year, we will introduce even more changes designed to keep beneficiaries seeking employment, including new non-financial sanctions to keep beneficiaries taking reasonable steps to enter the workforce, and granting jobseeker support for six months at a time. We're gearing up the welfare system to make the most of the forecast improvement in economic growth by providing MSD with the tools and focus to reduce benefit dependency and support more people into work.

Question No. 10—Disability Issues

10. KAHURANGI CARTER (Green) to the Minister for Disability Issues: Does she accept that she has ministerial responsibility for advocating on disability issues?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Disability Issues): Yes. That is why we've provided a record $1.1 billion funding boost to Disability Support Services in Budget 2024. It's also why we took immediate action to stabilise the disability support system. Our Government is determined to build a fair, sustainable, high-quality disability support system that delivers better outcomes for disabled people and their families.

Kahurangi Carter: Has she advocated for disability issues to ensure that our core democratic processes, such as select committees, are accessible to all New Zealanders; if not, why not?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: I recognise that for disabled New Zealanders there are significant challenges across accessing places of work or visits, including our Parliament, and I know that Speakers in previous years have provided greater access for New Zealanders with disabilities to participate in our democratic process.

Kahurangi Carter: Has she advocated for disability issues to ensure that the Government's no-cause eviction policy coming into effect today does not harm disabled people; if not, why not?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: There are a number of issues that are brought to the attention of Whaikaha, and we are building a work programme at the moment to ensure that disabled New Zealanders have greater access to employment, transport, housing, and a wide range of other areas.

Kahurangi Carter: Did she advocate for disability issues when she brought in new benefit sanctions that will push more disabled people into unsuitable work and require disabled people on jobseeker to reapply for their benefit twice as often; if not, why not?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: I can absolutely say that the Minister for Disability Issues proudly advocates with the Minister for Social Development and Employment advocates, and they very much share the overwhelming desire to see more New Zealanders in employment, including disabled New Zealanders. I don't have any lower expectation that disabled people shouldn't be in work.

Kahurangi Carter: Did she advocate for the 80 percent of young people who will be eligible for being sent to a boot camp who have a mental illness or disability; if not, why not?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: As I said, our Government is really proud about the fact that we want to see disabled New Zealanders participate and live fulfilling lives in employment, in education, in housing, and in moving about New Zealand in the way they should. Where there are challenges, we see that we will provide equal opportunities for them to get ahead and overcome the challenges they face.

Kahurangi Carter: Can she tell the House what she has done to meaningfully engage with the disabled communities, such as responding to correspondence and attending events in her ministerial capacity?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: Absolutely. I have met with so many disabled people, families, and carers over the period of time I've been the Minister, as well as with their organisations, the Disabled People's Organisations Coalition, and right now, just on Monday this week, new consultation has opened on the next recommendations of the review into Disability Support Services, so that we can improve access for disabled people. It opened on Monday. A consultation document is available. I'd encourage that member, through her networks, to ensure that people who are accessing Disability Support Services participate in that consultation process.

Question No. 11—Housing

11. PAULO GARCIA (National—New Lynn) to the Associate Minister of Housing: What recent announcements has he made about emergency housing?

Hon TAMA POTAKA (Associate Minister of Housing): Large-scale, long-term use of emergency housing was a social, moral, and fiscal catastrophe. We campaigned on ending this cataclysmic situation. When we came into office, we set Target 8 to reduce the number of households in emergency housing motels by 75 percent by 2030. Blue shoots, but this was achieved in 12 months. Furthermore, what this meant in reality is a reduction in people living in emergency housing from over 7,000 under the previous Government, to 1,130 today.

Paulo Garcia: How have you achieved this target?

Hon TAMA POTAKA: It's amazing what can be achieved by doing the basics well: first, identify a target, Target 8; second, focus on policy primarily ensuring that children aren't growing up in emergency housing, Priority One; third, invest funding in Budget 2024 to support the target being delivered and to keep households out of emergency housing and support those in emergency housing to get out into more secure housing.

Hon Member: To save money—that's all this is about: saving money.

SPEAKER: Just a moment. For the balance of this question, the answers will be heard in silence.

Paulo Garcia: Where are the people who have left emergency housing going?

Hon TAMA POTAKA: When we came into Government, we knew where there were around five out of 10 households—where they were going; we now know where over eight out of 10 households are going once they exit emergency housing. We also know that over 900 households, with nearly 2,000 tamariki, have gone into social housing as a result of Priority One. They are no longer contained in dark, dank emergency housing on places like Ulster Street in Hamilton and Fenton Street in Rotorua.

Hon Member: Now they're in cars.

Hon TAMA POTAKA: Officials are continuing to improve their insights on this matter.

SPEAKER: Was there some aspect of what I had previously said that the member on the end of the front row did not understand?

Paulo Garcia: What are your plans now that you've achieved this target?

Hon TAMA POTAKA: Blue shoots—this mahi's just started, and there's a lot more to do. We will continue to focus on maintaining performance against the target, keep actively monitoring and reporting on the target to ensure that these gains are sustainable. I'm proud of the start that we've made to get people out of emergency housing, but there's a lot more mahi to do, particularly with those who are continuing to live in very difficult situations. Kia ora.

Question No. 12—Immigration

12. Hon PHIL TWYFORD (Labour—Te Atatū) to the Minister of Immigration: Did she direct her officials to ensure Pacific labour-sending countries were consulted before the changes to the Recognised Seasonal Employer scheme were announced in August last year?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP (Minister of Housing) on behalf of the Minister of Immigration: From my recollection of conversations at the time, I directed my officials to ensure that the Pacific Recognised Seasonal Employer (RSE) countries were advised of the changes before they were publicly announced. Due to a miscommunication between officials, this did not happen. An apology for this was communicated to representatives of the relevant countries. Our relationship with our Pacific partners is a significant and important one and it was not acceptable that they found out about the changes through the media. I have been clear with my immigration officials that we need to ensure this does not occur with regard to any future changes to the scheme.

Hon Phil Twyford: How is informing Pacific Governments of a decision that is already made consultation and not just a heads-up?

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: It's a good question.

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Well, it is a good question, but here's a good answer.

Hon Dr Megan Woods: Is this on behalf of the Minister?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: On behalf of the Minister, I am advised that in 2023 the previous Government advised Pacific RSE countries one hour before the announcement was made. I am further advised that in 2021 the previous Government did not consult Pacific countries at all before the announcements were made.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Taking into account your guidance to the House previously, that was a straight question, and the answer had nothing to do with what this Government has done—not mentioned once. The answer was simply about what that Minister viewed the previous Government do to. Now, I'm not coming at this, as you may see, as a sensitive position. This isn't compliant with what's required. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: Excuse me. Someone will leave the House if there's an outburst during a point of order.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: My point in its most basic form is that question was not addressed.

SPEAKER: Well, I think if you were to have a look at Speakers' ruling 180/4, you might find that it is not unreasonable for someone to answer a question in relation to previous Government actions, particularly if it's relating to a question about their action in the same area. Is there another supplementary?

Hon Phil Twyford: There is. Does she accept that the failure to consult on policies that reduce the benefits Pacific countries get from the Recognised Seasonal Employer scheme risks damaging our relationship with our Pacific partners?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: I don't think it risks damaging the relationship, but, on behalf of the Minister, it is definitely true that Pacific RSE countries should have been informed of Cabinet's decision. That did not take place and apology for this has been communicated to representatives of the relevant countries. As I said in my primary answer, our relationship with the Pacific is very important.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: In terms of consultation, can the Minister confirm that despite that, foreign affairs was in constant contact with the relevant Pacific Island countries in 2024, and on the issue of the Recognised Seasonal Employment scheme—something started by you know who in 2007—and so in that context they were being brought up to date all the time—oh, and one thing: having never heard from anybody from foreign affairs in the three years before that?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: On behalf of the Minister, I think the member asking the question knows more about foreign affairs than I do, so I will take his word for it. But it is definitely true to say that the Minister of Foreign Affairs has been an extremely active Foreign Minister in the Pacific, rebuilding those very important international relationships.

Hon Phil Twyford: Was the failure to consult Pacific Governments before the announcement the fault of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, as she told the select committee yesterday?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: On behalf of the Minister, collectively, ministry officials across Government did not do as the Minister made clear. However, I would contrast the regrettable situation that happened in relation to 2024 with the actions of the previous Government on two occasions when once they were never told at all and the other time they found out an hour before.

Hon Phil Twyford: On what date did she direct her officials to ensure that there was consultation with Pacific Governments on cutting the pay of RSE workers?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: On behalf of the Minister, I don't have the specific day and time. If the member wants to know that, he can put it down in a written question. The decision was announced in August last year. So interpolating from the facts as I understand it, it would have been around that time.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Thank you, Mr Speaker. I took your advice and looked up the Speaker's ruling that you mentioned. I think there might be a misunderstanding. That's about questions to chairpersons of select committee. Could you clarify which one you'd like me to look at, please?

SPEAKER: No, that is the one. The distinction between chairperson of a select committee and—well, the actual point is there are Speakers' rulings from both Speaker Smith and Speaker Mallard and they are the rulings. A Government cannot be constrained from mentioning matters to do with a previous Government if it relates to questioning that they are currently undertaking. And if that's a new ruling, it's a new ruling, but that's the way I see it.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: I just wanted to know which one you were referring to—that's all.

© Scoop Media