Sitting date: 5 March 2025

ORAL QUESTIONS

QUESTIONS TO MINISTERS

Question No. 1—Finance

1. MIKE BUTTERICK (National—Wairarapa) to the Prime Minister: What are the Government's priorities for Budget 2025?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance): The Government's four priorities for Budget 2025 are lifting economic growth through measures to address long-term productivity challenges, implementing a social investment approach, keeping tight control of Government spending while funding a limited number of policy commitments and cost pressures, and developing a sustainable pipeline of long-term infrastructure investments.

Mike Butterick: What are examples of policy commitments that will be funded in the Budget?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: The Government has already announced a significant policy commitment for Budget 2025. That is the commitment of $1.37 billion a year from 2025 onwards to meet demographic, volume, and price pressures for front-line health services. In total, that comes to an additional $5.48 billion for Health New Zealand over the forecast period. Agreeing this very significant increase in funding ahead of time gave Health New Zealand certainty in its planning and demonstrates the Government's commitment to delivering the healthcare New Zealanders need.

Mike Butterick: Has the Government announced any other funding for health ahead of Budget 2025?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Yes. Budget 2025 provides just over a billion dollars of extra funding over the forecast period for additional medicines, including cancer treatments. On Monday, the Government announced measures to boost primary care, including increasing the number of doctors and nurses in primary care and a new 24/7 digital healthcare service for online appointments. These new measures will also be funded from Budget 2025. There is a myth propagated by the New Zealand Public Service Association and others that health funding is being reduced. Nothing could be further from the truth. Billions of dollars of additional funding are going into health to help ensure Kiwis have more access to the care they need where they need it.

Mike Butterick: How will this additional health funding fit within the Government's operating allowance?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: The Government has set an operating allowance for Budget 2025 of $2.4 billion. That is a tight allowance aimed at restricting growth in expenditure and reducing New Zealand's structural Budget deficit left to us by the last Government. It is important to remember, though, that allowances are a net concept. They encompass savings and revenue initiatives as well as new spending. More savings, therefore, in the Budget equals more opportunity to invest in front-line services. That is called reprioritisation, for the benefit of members who did not experience this concept when they were last in office.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Yesterday, you asked members on this side of the House to show a little more restraint. We have done so today. That would also involve you requiring Government members—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: There is a requirement that you're quiet during a point of order. Start again.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: I think yesterday you asked us to show more restraint on this side of the House, and you'll note today we have done exactly that. I think a reciprocal expectation is that Ministers will actually stick to the rules around Government questions and not use them to attack the Opposition. Almost every one of the answers delivered by Nicola Willis did exactly that. You didn't get a reaction from us because you asked us not to do that, but there should be some reaction to that.

SPEAKER: Yes, I did certainly take note of it, and I think, as I've said before, where there is a reference to something from the past that affects the policy today, that's reasonable, but I do think that the commentary that suggests otherwise and questions the motives of the other side of the House are unacceptable, and I'd ask all other Ministers who are about to answer questions today to bear that in mind.

Hon Chris Bishop: Speaking to the point of order.

SPEAKER: I presume there's a new point of order, given I've just ruled on that one.

Hon Chris Bishop: Speaking to the point of order, politics is about comparing—

SPEAKER: Well, hang on. It has to be a new point of order. I've just ruled on that one, so a new point of order.

Hon Chris Bishop: Point of order. Sir, politics is about comparing and contrasting. It is very difficult to answer questions as a Government without drawing some comparison to what has gone before or indeed what is coming into the future—

SPEAKER: I'll stop you there, because the last part of the last answer referred to something the previous Government had not done. I don't think that's particularly reasonable in the circumstances.

Hon David Parker: Because we had.

SPEAKER: Well, hang on. That didn't help either.

Hon Chris Bishop: No one believes you.

SPEAKER: No, that didn't help at all, so we're now going to go to question No. 2.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Point of order. The rightful complaint from Mr Parker is that he's put the very issue back at the centre of this parliamentary behaviour, and he's quite right. What you're saying is no criticism at all can happen. What happened to "Sticks and stones can break my bones, but names will never hurt me."? Over there, they're so sensitive to every little issue.

SPEAKER: That's not the issue. With all due respect—[Interruption] Just a minute. With all due respect, that completely misses the point I was making.

Question No. 2—Prime Minister

2. Hon MARAMA DAVIDSON (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, and especially our action to make it easier for Kiwis to get access to the healthcare that they need. This morning, our excellent Minister of Health, Simeon Brown, announced more support for nurses so they can play a greater role in primary care. That comes off the back of action yesterday to train more doctors here at home, including in primary care. On Monday, we announced action to support to support more nurses into primary care, making it easier for international doctors to practice here, and introduce a whole system of digital 24/7 care. Kiwis deserve to be able to see a doctor as quickly as they can. We're working hard to make that a reality. I would have thought the Opposition would want to support that.

Hon Marama Davidson: Does he agree that regardless of socio-economic status, a meal at lunchtime is a basic level of collective care that should be afforded to all tamariki?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: What I believe is that we need to help kids who are coming to school with no lunches, and that's why we saved the school lunch programme that was unfunded. We've got some challenges but we're working our way through them.

Hon Marama Davidson: Does he agree that providing school lunches is an important collective response, and one that is far more helpful than vilifying parents and families doing it tough?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: What I'd say in the last 24 hours is the vilification from Labour and the Greens who are telling working parents across New Zealand who happen to give their kids a Marmite sandwich and apple each and every day are bad parents is not acceptable.

Hon Marama Davidson: Does he agree with Mana College principal Jeff Chapman that the previous school lunch programme "was a nice little circular local economy, and it was working great. The contractor was providing local employment and using local food." If so, can he tell the House how many people have lost their jobs as a result of his Government's changes to Ka Ora, Ka Ako?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, what I can say is that we are actually funding the school lunch programme. We are feeding more kids than the previous Government did. We are doing so more efficiently, having saved $130 million, which has been put back into health and education for our kids. So I think it's a win-win. We've got some challenges to work through. The Minister, David Seymour, will deal with that.

Hon David Seymour: Is the Prime Minister also—

SPEAKER: Hang on.

Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: Beg your pardon, Mr Speaker.

SPEAKER: Your own side was pretty rowdy then, so we'll start again.

Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: Sure. Is the Prime Minister also aware that the previous Government had left no money in the Budget for that nice little circular economy from 2025 onwards, and how has this Government responded to that fiscal cliff?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I thank the member for his excellent question because that is exactly the case. The parties that that claim to advocate for those that most need food didn't fund the programme. We funded the programme, and we extended it to more kids.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: How many free school lunches programmes could be funded for the cost of the tax cuts the Government gave to landlords?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I think the member is conflating two very different issues, because what I'm proud about is actually rents under this Government are stable, not up $180 per week. What I'm comfortable about is that house prices didn't increase 40-50 percent, and what I'm comfortable about is actually social housing wait-lists are going down, and kids in emergency housing are out of motels. Nothing that the Labour Government could sort out despite the much-vaunted equity of housing, which they don't own anymore.

SPEAKER: That question demonstrates how difficult it is at times to work out both the value of a question or the intent of a question and the likely answer.

Nancy Lu: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I think the mike for the Prime Minister is actually not on, so most of the MPs sitting here cannot hear him at all.

SPEAKER: Well, some people might thank the Lord for small mercies, but I will ask the technicians to have a bit of a look at what's going on.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Thank you. There has been much discussion in this House about truth, and we are not allowed to say the word that denotes the opposite of that, but I am requesting your guidance. When the Prime Minister is stating things on the record such as "Rents have been stable." when the facts demonstrate the clear opposite of that, what are we to do?

SPEAKER: The member knows that if there is a concern about that, there is a remedy for her in the Standing Orders, and that would be the best way to deal with it.

Hon Marama Davidson: Will he stop pointing fingers at his Ministers and take responsibility, as Prime Minister, to feed our tamariki?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, we are. We have a school lunch programme. Look, we have said that—and the Minister has said himself that the food is in some cases not up to scratch. He's making sure he holds those contractors to account, he's working through the issues, and I've got every confidence that he will do so.

Chlöe Swarbrick: What happened to personal responsibility?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I do take responsibility and I have clear accountabilities on my Ministers, and that's what I'd expect to happen.

Hon David Seymour: Is it the view of his Government that good words and good wishes must be backed up by a fiscally sustainable plan to actually pay for the Government's programmes, and does he believe it's credible to have all those good words and good wishes but no plan to afford them?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: It is something that we have inherited: a Government previously that didn't fund Pharmac, a Government that didn't fund school lunches, and a Government that had billions of dollars of blowout on ferries and on Dunedin Hospital. Make the list; we're fixing it.

SPEAKER: Yeah, I'd just make the point that that's—we'll move on.

Hon Marama Davidson: Will he commit to continuing Ka Ora, Ka Ako?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I commit, and the Minister is very committed, to making sure we make the school lunch programme work and we get what we contracted for. But, as I have said before, we will continue to provide children who need lunches with a school lunch programme. It's important because we know the evidence is that if they don't have food, they don't learn, and they end up on welfare—that's not great.

SPEAKER: Question—

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: You know the majority of kids in poverty have working parents, eh?

SPEAKER: Yeah, when you're ready, we might move on.

Question No. 3—Prime Minister

3. 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 action to support Kiwis with the cost of living. Two years ago, inflation was running at 7.2 percent; today, it's 2.2 percent. Two years ago today, the official cash rate was 4.75 percent, and today it is 3.75 percent. Two years ago, food inflation was 10.3 percent, and today it's just 2.3 percent. You know, it's an encouraging sign that we're making progress. We know there's a lot more for us to do, and the best thing that we can do is grow the economy so that we can create those jobs, lift incomes, and actually create opportunities for more Kiwis so they've got more money in their pocket. That's important.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: On what day and at what time did he first discuss allegations that Andrew Bayly had a physical altercation with a staff member, with Andrew Bayly?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: As I have previously said, I was made aware of the issue on Thursday, and Andrew Bayly resigned very late on Friday.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I didn't ask him when he was informed or when Andrew Bayly resigned; I asked him when he first discussed those allegations with Andrew Bayly.

SPEAKER: Ask the question again.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: On what date and at what time did he first discuss allegations Andrew Bayly had a physical altercation with a staff member, with Andrew Bayly?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: My office had conversations with Andrew Bayly on the Wednesday and the Thursday, and I discussed with Andrew Bayly on the Friday.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: When did he formally receive Andrew Bayly's resignation as a Minister, and in what form was his resignation delivered?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: It was a phone call, very late on Friday evening.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Did he indicate to Andrew Bayly that if he didn't resign, he would be dismissed; if so, when did he do that?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: No. As I have said publicly, Andrew Bayly resigned and he made the right decision.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: If Andrew Bayly resigned on Friday, why didn't he inform the Governor-General of that resignation until Monday, and does he believe that fulfils his legal obligation to "keep the Governor-General fully informed about the general conduct of the Government"?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Yes.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Did he ask Andrew Bayly what he did to the staff member who made the complaint, and was Andrew Bayly's account consistent or different from the account of the staff member?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Andrew Bayly talked in his statement about the incident, and I've got nothing further to add to that.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. This is a serious matter in which the Prime Minister has indicated that if Andrew Bayly hadn't resigned, then he would have fired him. I have asked him whether he asked Andrew Bayly what he actually did in order for the Prime Minister to lose that confidence in Andrew Bayly, and whether that is consistent with the victim of Andrew Bayly's physical altercation. This is a fairly important matter of public importance where a Minister has lost their job. I don't think it's unreasonable that the Prime Minister actually addresses that question.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: In answer to the first part of the question: yes.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Prime Minister, will you explain to Mr Hipkins that the constitutional connection of the Governor-General only happens when he as Prime Minister first accepts the resignation?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I'm comfortable that we have handled the constitutional arrangements well.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Is there still an open investigation into the complaint about Andrew Bayly's physical altercation with a staff member; if so, who's conducting that investigation?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, there were concerns raised, the Minister reviewed the incident, it didn't meet his expectation, and he has resigned.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Can I repeat the question: is there still an open investigation into the complaint about Andrew Bayly's physical altercation with a staff member; if so, who's conducting that investigation?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Andrew Bayly has relayed the incident in public statements, he has apologised to the relevant staff, and he has subsequently resigned.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Again, it's a fairly significant matter of importance to the public when a Minister resigns in the circumstances that Andrew Bayly did. If there is an ongoing investigation into this matter, then the Prime Minister has a duty to tell the public that. It's a fairly straight question.

SPEAKER: That is a fair point.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I'm not going to comment on individual employment matters; it's a privacy issue and, actually, it's up for Ministerial Services to take it forward from there.

Question No. 4—Health

4. SAM UFFINDELL (National—Tauranga) to the Minister of Health: What recent announcements has he made on improving access to timely, quality healthcare for all New Zealanders?

Hon SIMEON BROWN (Minister of Health): Good news for Kiwis this week. Our Government is delivering on our commitment to improve access to timely, quality care for all New Zealanders. This week I have announced a significant healthcare boost to ensure Kiwis see a GP faster, including a range of actions to ensure overseas-trained doctors can work in New Zealand. I also announced more locally trained doctors in general practices, including increasing the total extra medical school placements to 100 each year over the course of this Government. We're also boosting our nursing workforce by training more nurse practitioners and supporting advanced education for nurses in general practices. These initiatives will help strengthen the healthcare workforce, reduce wait times, and ensure Kiwis can receive the timely, quality healthcare they need.

Sam Uffindell: Why is the Government increasing the number of overseas-trained doctors working in primary care?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, we recognise the need for more doctors working in our healthcare system, which is why we are funding a new two-year primary care training programme for up to 100 additional overseas-trained doctors. It doesn't make sense that overseas-trained doctors living in New Zealand are keen to work in primary care but lack the training opportunities to do so. By funding 100 clinical placements, we will offer the necessary support to help them work in general practices where they're needed to help give Kiwis the timely, quality access to the healthcare they need.

Sam Uffindell: What is the Government doing to increase the number of placements at New Zealand medical schools?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, to reduce wait times for New Zealanders, we can't just rely on sourcing our doctors from overseas. We must also ensure a sustainable pipeline of New Zealand - trained doctors. Under our Government, medical school placements have already increased by 75 places each year. Increasing this to 100 places will provide more opportunities for talented Kiwis to train as doctors and help ensure New Zealanders have access to the timely, quality healthcare that they need.

Sam Uffindell: Why is the Government increasing the number of training places for nurse practitioners in primary care?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, nurse practitioners are highly skilled professionals who can diagnose conditions, prescribe medicines, and develop treatment plans for patients. By increasing the number of training places to 120 a year, we're empowering more nurses to work alongside our hard-working GPs and deliver timely, quality healthcare in local communities. This investment will ensure more patients are seen sooner, easing pressure on the system and reducing wait times for New Zealanders.

Question No. 5—Finance

5. Hon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour—Mana) to the Minister of Finance: Does she stand by her statement that she is looking at "changes to strengthen transparency and fiscal responsibility"; if so, is she confident that the fiscal risks in Budget 2024 are manageable?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance): Yes. I was shocked, on becoming Minister of Finance, at the magnitude of unfunded fiscal risks left by the previous Government, such as Lake Onslow, the income insurance scheme, Auckland Light Rail. I was also shocked by the large number of fiscal cliffs left in the accounts, where funding for an initiative had only been provided for a limited period despite a clear public expectation of it continuing, like Pharmac essential medicines. And to the second part of the question, fiscal risks are by definition uncertain; they may or may not occur. If they do, they will be managed, and the Government has choices about how to do that.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Does she stand by her statement in relation to the Cook Strait ferries that "costs are expected to be much less than would have been the case with Project iREX"; and, if so, what will the cost of the fiscal risk of Cook Strait resilience be?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: In answer to the first part of the question, yes, and in answer to the second part of the question, that depends on the procurement approach and commercial negotiation yet to occur.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: How can she be confident that the alternative will cost less than the previous project when her Cabinet paper said the required port infrastructure "cannot be confidently costed"?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Because the point of comparison is Project iREX, the biggest dog of an infrastructure project New Zealand has seen in many years, that blew out, members, from $750 million to $4 billion and climbing, with only 21 percent of the costs actually being for the core project of replacing the ferries. That project was terrible and was getting worse, and by stopping it we have saved New Zealanders money.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Supplementary question.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Supplementary question.

SPEAKER: Supplementary question—we'll go three over here. We always do three.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Three what?

SPEAKER: Three supplementaries for the primary questioner.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Why?

SPEAKER: Well, because it's a little rule I've brought in.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: When?

SPEAKER: About a year ago.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Does she agree with the Minister for Rail who said the break fee "costs us way less than 300 million"?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: I find it is wise to agree with the Minister for Rail.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Is the finance Minister confident that when this is all resolved, the savings to the New Zealand taxpayer, based on Treasury's latest prediction, will be in excess of $2 billion?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Well, I'm delighted to hear that the Minister for Rail has these matters in hand. And I would acknowledge that even Grant Robertson was concerned by the ballooning cost of Project iREX. In fact, in a letter he sent to the KiwiRail chairman in 2023—

SPEAKER: Just a minute. It might be all right in response from a Government question, but Speaker's ruling 181/3 is very clear: it is not reasonable for a Government question to be asked that leads to an attack upon a previous Government. It's not my ruling; it's one that's been there for a long time.

Hon Nicola Willis: It wasn't going to be an attack; it was complimenting him.

SPEAKER: Well, I could feel it coming.

Hon Chris Bishop: It wasn't an attack. We're praising him.

SPEAKER: I beg your pardon?

Hon Nicola Willis: We were praising him—he saw the risk.

SPEAKER: Yeah, well, I'm sure they are well aware of the comment.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Does she agree with the Minister for Rail that Treasury's prediction is that this will save $2 billion; can she confirm that?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Well, as I've just said, I find it's always wise to agree with the Minister for Rail.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: How can she be confident the fiscal risk is manageable when she has no idea how much the new project will cost, she got a new figure during question time from the Minister for Rail, and has no control over what the Minister for Rail will do?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Because—and forgive me for the repetition—the point of comparison was such a dog of a project that actually we just need to do simple things well to do better and save New Zealanders money. I want to share with you a characterisation of Project iREX by someone that I think members across the House know: "KiwiRail under-scoped the landside infrastructure in 2021 meaning the decision to procure two large rail-enabled ships at that time was premature. To date, we are yet to see a satisfactory explanation for why this was the case." That is a quote from the Hon Grant Robertson.

Question No. 6—Education

6. KATIE NIMON (National—Napier) to the Minister of Education: What steps have been taken to improve the delivery of school property for students across the country?

Hon ERICA STANFORD (Minister of Education): After a ministerial inquiry found the Ministry of Education's school property function was not fit for purpose, this Government has been driving for stronger performance and efficiency by investing far more into maintaining existing school buildings and delivering more new classrooms for less through the use of standardised, repeatable designs and offsite manufactured classrooms. In this financial year, we've already increased the number of cost-effective offsite manufactured buildings delivered—a 35 percent increase on the last financial year and we've still got a long way to run. In 2023, only 433 new classrooms were built. In 2024, 581 were built—a 30 percent increase on the year before because we are driving efficiency, delivering results, and building more classrooms.

Katie Nimon: How is she able to build more classrooms?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: Well, as previously mentioned, we're delivering more offsite manufactured buildings. The average cost per classroom when we arrived in Government was $1.2 million. This is now down to $870,000—nearly a 30 percent reduction. And we are still driving this down so that more students can benefit from safe, warm, dry learning environments that support them to achieve. With our drive to use standardised designs and offsite manufacturing, we're significantly reducing construction time and costs so more classrooms can be delivered more quickly and more efficiently.

Katie Nimon: What examples has she seen that show an improvement in the delivery of school property?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: Well, one example is Wellington Girls' College, just up the road here, where 14 classrooms over four two-storey modulars were delivered in just 12 weeks, at a cost of around $550,000 per classroom, representing a 35 percent saving on the current value for money cost per classroom. This is just one example of delivering efficiency and results, using standardised designs and offsite manufacturing to significantly reduce construction time and costs so more classrooms can be delivered more quickly and more efficiently.

Katie Nimon: What feedback has she seen?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: Well, a school in my electorate, as it turns out, where the ministry drove great value for money by retrofitting an existing building, rather than building new, wrote to the ministry to say, "We want to express our deepest gratitude for the exceptional and efficient work you've done over the Christmas period to ensure the successful completion of our interim seismic property project through four of our whānau buildings." This is just one example of many of driving value for money so we can deliver more upgrades to more classrooms and more schools across New Zealand, because we are a Government that delivers.

Question No. 7—Children

7. KAHURANGI CARTER (Green) to the Minister for Children: What changes, if any, does she intend to make in response to the Aroturuki Tamariki | Independent Children's Monitor's Experiences of Care in Aotearoa 2023/24 report that found that Oranga Tamariki social workers are under significant pressure?

Hon KAREN CHHOUR (Minister for Children): Thank you, Mr Speaker. Firstly, I just want to take this opportunity to say thank you to Oranga Tamariki social workers for what they do and also to the Independent Children's Monitor (ICM) for what they do. I regularly talk with social workers across the country and I've personally visited at least 29 Oranga Tamariki sites since becoming Minister, and I'm constantly impressed by their dedication and commitment to caring for children. I know it takes a special kind of person to do the work that they do. This Government did not need to wait for this fourth report from the ICM. We already, amongst other things, secured funding of $68.5 million through Budget 2024 to upgrade the outdated case management technology system so social workers can have the tools they need, which means they can spend more time with children and family that they work with. We've also recruited 33 allied support workers, which is a front-line role to support social workers by taking on tasks that don't require a social work qualification, freeing up social workers to focus on core work.

Kahurangi Carter: How does she expect social workers to collect data when their workloads prevent them from visiting all tamariki assigned to them, and what does she say to the 63 percent of tamariki that aren't receiving the minimum standard of care under the national care standards regulations?

Hon KAREN CHHOUR: I absolutely agree that it's difficult to collect data around young children. That is why we invested the $68.5 million into an updated case management system, which will allow them to collect that data better. And it's why I also, in August 2024, set key performance indicators on the chief executive around the frequency of visits of children in care, timeliness around reports of concern, and supporting caregivers, because this means a lot to me and to the staff looking after our young people.

Kahurangi Carter: What does she say to the PSA's national secretary, Fleur Fitzsimons, who has highlighted: "Decades of reviews and inquiries have consistently identified high staff workloads as a barrier to Oranga Tamariki consistently delivering on its purpose. The Government's reckless spending cuts have seen Oranga Tamariki lose over 400 workers, meaning those remaining shoulder even higher workloads."?

Hon KAREN CHHOUR: I'm sure the PSA is entitled to their opinion, but, at the end of the day, this Government is committed to making sure that every dollar we spend goes towards our young people, and we are prioritising our front-line staff to make sure that they do have the tools that they need to do their job and do their job well.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: In line with MP Kahurangi Carter's recent select committee request, if she offers the issue a hug, will it go away?

SPEAKER: Yeah, that's not something that the Minister has direct responsibility for. Parmjeet Parmar.

Dr Parmjeet Parmar: Thank you, Mr Speaker. To the Minister: how many additional social workers did Oranga Tamariki recruit last year?

Hon KAREN CHHOUR: Last year, Oranga Tamariki recruited 463 field social workers—410 of these were permanent roles. With attrition, this means that the number of field social workers has increased by more than 200 in the last year. We have also trialled and now implemented—as I said in the primary answer—allied support worker roles. This is 33 support workers, working alongside front-line staff to free them up to do their role.

Kahurangi Carter: Can she confirm that she thinks the previous statement is factually incorrect, or is she dismissing it because of who the quote comes from?

Hon KAREN CHHOUR: I never said it was factually incorrect; I said she's entitled to her opinion.

Kahurangi Carter: What does she say to the 507 tamariki and rangatahi that were abused or neglected in State care, about the hope for their future when there has been little improvement for them in the last four years, and the report stating that it is unlikely to change in the next report?

Hon KAREN CHHOUR: Since becoming the Minister for Children, and even before being the Minister for Children, I've always advocated for the safety and wellbeing of our children in care. This is why I set it as a priority for Oranga Tamariki to get back to their core focus, which is the safety and wellbeing of our young people in care and those that come to the attention of Oranga Tamariki. No abuse is OK, but what I would say is I've spent the last year going around the country encouraging people that if they see something, say something. This report shows that we now have staff that feel they can speak up when they see something's going wrong, and we can finally deal with the problem.

Hon Willow-Jean Prime: Does she agree with the Independent Children's Monitor, who is reported as saying that recent internal restructuring of Oranga Tamariki had pulled focus away from front-line work, while scarce resources were even harder to secure following the changes to the commissioning and contracting, and, if not, why not?

Hon KAREN CHHOUR: Look, change is always hard. But what I can tell you is going up and down the country since becoming Minister, the culture and the way staff are dealing with our young people is showing a real, positive turn-around. This has been an issue for a very long time. This is a four-year report; I'm responsible for this year that has come by. I'm not happy with that report, and I am making sure that we do better in the future.

Hon Willow-Jean Prime: Point of order, Mr Speaker. She didn't answer my question about whether she agreed with the monitor or not.

SPEAKER: Well, I think she did by saying that she was responsible for one year of the four, and that she was doing her best to improve on the matters raised. I think that certainly addresses the question.

Question No. 8—Education

8. HANA-RAWHITI MAIPI-CLARKE (Te Pāti Māori—Hauraki-Waikato) to the Minister of Education: Is she confident that her actions will improve education achievement for all rangatahi?

Hon ERICA STANFORD (Minister of Education): I am absolutely confident in that, and I stand by my actions to build a world-class, leading education system that delivers excellent and equitable outcomes for every child, including tamariki Māori. Right now, this term, every child learning in te reo Māori has access to high-quality, nationally consistent structured maths books benefiting 27,000 ākonga across the country. We've refreshed Te Marautanga o Aotearoa to be knowledge-rich year by year in te reo Māori. We've launched a structured programme to teach reading, writing, and speaking in te reo. We've developed purpose-built phonics check tools to monitor student progression in te reo. We're delivering free decodable books that we have created in te reo Māori. We're progressing my Māori education action plan, and I've established my Māori education advisory group.

Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke: Does she stand by her new NCEA reading, writing, and maths tests, when these tests are failing students in low-income schools and principals at these schools have warned that these changes will create a generation of school leavers with no qualifications, most of whom will be Māori or Pasifika?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: Those assessments—literacy and numeracy assessments—are not failing the students. The students are failing the assessments, and it is upon this Government to make sure that every single one of those students gets the assistance that they need to get a base level of literacy and numeracy so that they can live the life that they want. Because if we don't do that, we are pushing the problem down the road and we all know what happens to young rangatahi who do not have good literacy and numeracy. This Government will not stand by and let that happen.

Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke: Does she agree with New Zealand Educational Institute President Ripika Lessels that "The evidence shows tamariki Māori succeed best in Kaupapa Māori Kura where te reo me ngā tikanga is supported. Resource teachers of Māori play a key role in supporting teachers and children in these schools."?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: I agree that children should have choice. There are many families who would like to send their children to a kura kaupapa and there are many families who would like to send their children to an English-medium school. The purpose of this Government and the drive that I have is to make sure that no matter where tamariki Māori end up, they have an excellent education and equitable outcomes.

Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke: What message is the Government sending to young Māori, when they stress the importance of literacy on one hand while considering defunding expert teachers who support literacy and te reo Māori on the other?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: Well, we are out for consultation around a role, the resource teacher (RT) Māori role. The reason that we're out for consultation is that there have been multiple evaluations that have said that this particular service delivery model is inequitable and is not optimised, and I'll give you one example of that. In Southland there are five RTs Māori; in Northland there are only three. Yet rangatahi Māori predominantly are in Northland, in far greater numbers than in Southland. That is the reason why we need to take a look at this resource and work out exactly how we can optimise it so more young people have access to that specialist help.

Question No. 9—Health

9. Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Labour) to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by his statement, "my focus is and always will be on improving patient outcomes. Patients will be my number one priority", and what is the role of health workers in achieving those outcomes for patients?

Hon SIMEON BROWN (Minister of Health): Yes, I stand by my statement in the context it was made. My focus is and always will be on patients and improving patient outcomes. That's why we are refocusing the healthcare system on delivering access to timely, quality healthcare for all New Zealanders through our Government's health targets. Our Government knows that front-line health workers are critical in delivering these services. That's why our front-line workforce—Health New Zealand—is the largest and strongest it has ever been, with over 2,000 more nurses employed at Health New Zealand since 2023, earning on average a salary of $125,000, comparable now with nurses in New South Wales. On this side of the House, we are unashamed that it is the patients who will always be at the heart of every decision we make, and it is the healthcare workers who are critical to delivering those services.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Does he agree with Christopher Luxon, who said with respect to nurses, "Whether they're in aged care, whether they're at GP community practices, or in the DHB-equivalent system they should be paid the same", or Simeon Brown, who said nursing wages are "not my job"?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Look, I agree with the Prime Minister, and the quote that was taken out of context by The Post this morning was in regards to contractual negotiations between doctor clinics and their staff. That was a quote taken out of context, but I absolutely agree with the need to make sure that there is pay parity between nurses working in our hospitals and in our primary care areas. Ultimately, we know it will take time to deliver that, but that's why we're focusing back on primary care, which was something the last Government didn't.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Are the dietitians, the mental health nurses, the pharmacists, the public health nurses represented by the Public Service Association (PSA) "bureaucrats"?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, I'm very happy to talk about the PSA union, led by a failed Labour Party candidate who couldn't even win her seat, and ultimately the union's doing what the union does: when the National Party's in Government, they attack the Government. That's what they're doing, and I completely get what they're trying to do, but, ultimately, my focus is on the patients and getting better outcomes for them. That's what this Government is unashamedly focused on.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Why did he attack Fleur Fitzsimons rather than respond to the contents of the PSA report; couldn't he be the bigger man, at least metaphorically? [Interruption]

SPEAKER: I think you just turned it into a free-for-all.

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Look, I'm open to the low blow from time to time, but what I would say is this Government is focused on patients. They're focused on the unions. They got rid of the health targets, they ran down our health system, they restructured it during the pandemic, and they forgot about the patients. We will stand on the side of the patients while they stand on the side of unions—and shame on them. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: Hold on for a minute. OK.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Why, if he's so committed to patient outcomes, won't he respond seriously to a report that documents delays in rehab for stroke patients, malnourished cancer patients, and untreated babies left with cleft palates because of his Government's cuts?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, if she's talking about the PSA union's report, which she's talking about again, well, I'll tell you what: the PSA union member, who is clearly leading that organisation, who failed to win her seat—

SPEAKER: No—hang on, no.

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Clearly, all she's trying to do is get a high list ranking at the next election.

SPEAKER: I think we'll have an answer to the question, rather than a political statement. Nothing further to say?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Can she repeat the question?

SPEAKER: Repeat the question, then—without the end barb, might be a good idea.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Why, if he's so committed to patient outcomes, won't he respond seriously to a report that documents delays in rehab for stroke patients, malnourished cancer patients, and untreated babies left with cleft palates?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, I acknowledge that there is a need for greater investment in our health system, and I'm proud of the investment this Government has made. We have increased health funding by $16.68 billion over three Budgets. We are focusing the system back on front-line service delivery. That is the focus this Government is bringing in putting the patients back at the heart, not the bureaucratic change which the last Government was focused on.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Will he take up the invitation posed by professionals struggling with the hiring freeze in Health New Zealand: "We'd love someone to come to our team meeting and explain why we do not have approval to advertise for the current vacancies we are holding.", and, if not, does he worry that he is out of touch with the reality of healthcare in New Zealand?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, there are hundreds of jobs advertised at Health New Zealand, currently, online and available for people to put their names forward. There is no such thing as a hiring freeze. We are focused on front-line service delivery. As I said in my primary answer, we have the largest healthcare workforce ever in New Zealand. We have over 2,000 more nurses employed, under this Government, in Health New Zealand. We are focusing back on the delivery of services for New Zealanders, and those members should look in the mirror. When they got rid of the health targets, they saw the outcomes reduced for patients, and then they decided to restructure during a pandemic—shame on them.

Hon Nicola Willis: Can the Minister confirm that the survey that the Opposition member keeps referring to as gospel was actually sent to more than 24,000 union members, and yet only 1,287 chose to reply, meaning it only had a 5.3 percent response rate from its own members?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, that is 100 percent correct, and what I'd say to the PSA union is to start focusing on the patients, rather than just trying to get a high Labour Party list spot at the next election.

SPEAKER: No, no, that last part—it's a bit of a shame when you make the point, and then lose it with that sort of stuff.

Question No. 10—Police

10. CAMERON BREWER (National—Upper Harbour) to the Minister of Police: What recent announcements has he made about Police's work to tackle gangs?

Hon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police): Last week, the Minister of Justice and I announced that police have done outstanding work in enforcing the Gangs Act, laying charges and seizing insignia. The Gangs Act has proven to be an enabling piece of legislation as well, providing a vehicle for police to cause further disruption to gangs through a raft of other changes, including firearms. Contrary to all the commentary prior to the implementation of the legislation, compliance has been high and it is obvious to the public that our police are controlling the streets again, not the gangs.

Cameron Brewer: How many charges have police laid under the Gangs Act?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: As of yesterday, police have laid 385 charges under the Gangs Act 2024, and 3,546 other charges overall against individuals on the National Gang List. This Government is committed to giving police the tools they need to significantly disrupt gangs.

Cameron Brewer: How many patch and firearm seizures have been made?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: As at 19 February, police have seized 76 patches and 67 firearms from gang members since the new legislation came into force. It has proven to be a valuable tool for police to find further evidence of offending and lay more charges.

Cameron Brewer: What recent examples of great work and tackling gangs can he share?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: On Tuesday, 14 January, Napier police executed a search warrant and found a loaded firearm, ammunition, cannabis, methamphetamine, and $3,900 in cash, laying multiple charges. In the Central Hawke's Bay, on 30 January, police arrested an Outlaws gang member and seized three firearms, including a fully loaded pistol, which was in the same bag as a quantity of methamphetamine. I want to thank all our police who are doing an outstanding job in cracking down on gangs and organised crime.

Question No. 11—Justice

11. MARK CAMERON (ACT) to the Associate Minister of Justice: How are firearms prohibition orders intended to make New Zealand safer?

Hon NICOLE McKEE (Associate Minister of Justice): Last year Parliament passed the Firearms Prohibition Orders Legislation Amendment Act to keep firearms out of the hands of gang members and other high-risk offenders. Last Sunday, that legislation came into force. This means police have more powers to search individuals subject to a firearms prohibition order, along with their vehicles and premises, to ensure that they are not in possession of firearms.

Mark Cameron: How will improvements to firearms prohibition orders ensure future offenders can't access firearms?

Hon NICOLE McKEE: Previously, firearm prohibition orders were limited to offenders convicted of specific violent offences like murder, serious assault, sexual violence, and aggravated robbery. I have expanded the qualifying criteria, allowing firearms prohibition orders to be issued to gang members and criminals convicted of drug, firearms, and other violent offences. This means senior gang members can no longer avoid firearm prohibition orders by having their prospects commit offences on their behalf.

Mark Cameron: What will improved police search powers mean for offenders subject to firearms prohibition orders now that the new regime is in force?

Hon NICOLE McKEE: Police now have the power to search gang members and serious offenders subject to a firearms prohibition order at any time. They do not need to suspect they're breaching their firearms prohibition order or that they are committing any other offence. Firearms prohibition orders are only effective if police have the power to enforce them, and I have made sure that they do. Criminals are now on notice. Illegal firearm possession will not be tolerated and they will be held accountable for their actions.

Mark Cameron: What does the improved firearms prohibition orders regime mean for this Government's commitment to restoring law and order?

Hon NICOLE McKEE: I'm delivering on this Government's commitment to crack down on crime and restore law and order. Last year reported violent crime dropped for the first time since 2018. With these improved firearms prohibition orders now in force, I am confident this downward trend in violent crime will continue, making our communities safer and ensuring criminals are held to account.

Question No. 12—Justice

12. Hon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central) to the Minister of Justice: Does he stand by his statements and actions in respect of extended powers of arrest and detention for ordinary citizens?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice): Yes, in the context in which they were given. I particularly stand by my statement yesterday that "New Zealanders are fed up with the level of retail crime that they are experiencing in our communities. That's why this Government has considered proposals to change the rules, because if you want to have a different outcome, sometimes you have to change things, and that is what we're proposing."

Hon Dr Duncan Webb: Did he consider the opinion of Hospitality New Zealand, who told the Ministerial Advisory Group for Victims of Retail Crime that Hospitality New Zealand would consider it a significant health and safety risk to both staff and customers if we start advocating for stronger detaining abilities before he announced extended powers of citizen's arrest?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Yes. I mean, I think the member is pointing to the fact that there is a widespread variety of views on this matter, but the point I would make is in the hospitality context, we have laws in place after 9 p.m. where a citizen's arrest can be conducted, but before 9 p.m. it can't be, and so fundamentally it's about trying to rectify that situation. Of course, no hospitality worker is obliged to do anything by these proposals. It is an option that is available and can be used if the circumstances are appropriate.

Hon Dr Duncan Webb: Why did he announce proposals for extended powers for citizen's arrest when the only written submissions to Sunny Kaushal's Ministerial Advisory Group for Victims of Retail Crime that clearly supported increased powers of arrest for ordinary citizens was the submission of Sunny Kaushal in the name of the Dairy and Business Owners Group?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Why? Well, because we believe it's a good policy. The ministerial advisory group led by Sunny Kaushal has a variety of people in it and they all have their different views. We fully expect that they will come up with proposals which are bold and which may well be pushing the boat out, but we need to experiment and come up with different approaches, otherwise we're going to have the same outcome. I think all New Zealanders are fed up with the level of retail crime that they're seeing in our communities. We've had a very significant increase over the past few years, and if the member wants to argue for the current arrangements being perfect and everything being fine, well that's up to him, but I think we need to do something differently.

Hon Dr Duncan Webb: Did he or his ministerial advisory group for victims of retail crime consult with the Police Association, whose president Chris Cahill said, "The idea that the public can do this safely is just putting them at risk that isn't necessary." before he announced his powers of citizen's arrest?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Well, I'd be interested as to how the Police Association consider it's OK at 9.05 p.m. to do something and not OK at 8.55 p.m. to do something. So, anyway, that's part of the ongoing discussion, and this legislation, when it's introduced, will come into the House. We are sure that we'll get a wide variety of views in the select committee process, but this is a Government that is prepared to do different things to get different outcomes, and we're not satisfied with the situation on our streets right now. We're not satisfied with the level of retail crime. This is one of many things that we're considering in order to improve the situation, alongside bringing in real consequences for crime with our sentencing regime, the return of three strikes, and many other things, such as giving the police extra powers to deal with organised crime.

Hon Dr Duncan Webb: Is it the fact that he or his ministerial advisory group consulted with Destiny Church leader Brian Tamaki, who suggested his thugs, who have disrupted lawful activities, will use power of arrest and detention when he said, "How Excited i am That MAN UP Is about to Recieve Increased Powers to Police.. Where Law and Order has Failed", and is he concerned that new citizen's arrest powers may be misused by such malicious actors?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Well, I did think it was a cheap shot by the New Zealand Herald to refer to Destiny being in support of this proposal. Nobody asked Destiny. Nobody is particularly concerned in the views of the Destiny Church on this matter, and we certainly don't make our decisions as to whether to progress law and order policies based on the opinions of the good bishop, and I'd encourage that member not to pay too much attention to his views either.

Hon Dr Duncan Webb: Is he concerned that Sunny Kaushal, the chair of the ministerial advisory group, had a deep and significant conflict of interest when he, essentially, made a submission to himself when he submitted in his capacity as chair of the Dairy and Business Owners Group and then largely adopted the recommendations he had made to himself?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Well, of course, we did appoint Sunny Kaushal because of his wide-ranging experience on the front line, dealing particularly with the dairy owners who have to deal with a horrendous level of abuse and violence in our communities. We have thoughts very much in mind, particularly for husband and wife teams working very hard in the small retail sector, trying to make a living, often coming from other countries, trying to settle in New Zealand and make a living and struggling with the level of violent and ongoing retail crime. We want to offer them solutions, rather than just continuing on with the same approach that we've had for such a long time.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Can I ask the Minister as to whether or not he's seeking cross-party support to promote shoppers, not robbers—why are we being naive?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: I would like to extend the opportunity for the other members of this House to reach across the divide and approach this in a bipartisan manner, because I think all New Zealanders and all members of this Parliament should be focused on improving the situation that people experience in our community and to restore law and order in this country.

© Scoop Media