ORAL QUESTIONS

QUESTIONS TO MINISTERS

Question No. 1—Economic Growth

1. TAKUTAI TARSH KEMP (Te Pāti Māori—Tāmaki Makaurau) to the Minister for Economic Growth: Will she ensure that her proposal to scrap the living wage requirement in Government contracts for cleaning, catering, and security guard services will not result in pay cuts for these workers?

Hon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue) on behalf of the Minister for Economic Growth: Yes, I can assure that—it's the law. Existing contracts have to be honoured.

Takutai Tarsh Kemp: What message does she have for the workers, like those in Parliament who clean her office and toilet and keep her safe, when she scraps the rules that ensure they are paid enough to live?

Hon SIMON WATTS: What I can say is that employers that are currently employing Kiwis—and hard-working Kiwis—across this country will still be bound by the terms of employment agreements negotiated with their staff and unions. And, as we step back from this issue, I think it is important to acknowledge that the consequences of these proposed changes remove complexity and duplication, and actually make it easier for New Zealand businesses to expand and to grow by winning Government contracts. That is good for New Zealand workers, and that is good for New Zealand.

Takutai Tarsh Kemp: What is the response to cleaner Liam Shaw, who said, "The Living Wage basically allows me to survive. Before the Living Wage came in I was really struggling to afford groceries, especially considering how high my rent was, and the Living Wage has allowed me to thrive in what would be seen as a very basic sense."?

Hon SIMON WATTS: On behalf of the Minister, what I can say to that individual is that we have a Government that is relentlessly focused on economic growth and reducing the impact of the cost of living on those New Zealanders. We are working very hard for individuals—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Hold on. Hold on! Stop! That has to stop. That's ridiculous. Just yelling across the House is not an interjection; it's just rabble-ous behaviour. Is there anything more that the Minister wants to add that might be useful for the House?

Hon SIMON WATTS: Growth.

SPEAKER: Good. I agree.

Takutai Tarsh Kemp: How does your Government expect workers to survive when you are systematically stripping away every safety net, cutting wages, reducing benefit, sanctioning the vulnerable, and making life harder for those already struggling; is this what is meant by reducing red tape, submitting those workers to the whip of the State?

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Point of order. This is meant to be question time. Questions that are framed with a question that end up with an answer all at the same time and then go on to the second and third question should not be allowed. That's not what a supplementary question is about. I think these rudimentary things are getting worse and worse in this Parliament and we need to change that.

SPEAKER: Well, thank you for your advice. I certainly appreciate it. But can I also point out that questions that are—the Standing Orders for questions are mirrored by the Standing Orders for answers. So I'm happy to apply the same criteria in both directions. Ask the question again—in a way that brings it into line with Standing Order 390, I think it is.

Takutai Tarsh Kemp: How does the Government expect workers to survive when you are systematically stripping away every safety net, cutting wages—

SPEAKER: No, you can't make a political statement like that, with all due respect. You can ask a question about the programme; you can't speculate about the consequence of a programme. So have a think about how you might ask it a different way.

Takutai Tarsh Kemp: How does the Government expect workers to survive when you are stripping away—

SPEAKER: No. No, no, you can't—I'm sorry.

Takutai Tarsh Kemp: How does your Government expect workers to survive?

Hon SIMON WATTS: On behalf of the Minister, what I can be clear about is that this is a Government that is focused on economic growth, which will benefit all New Zealand workers. That is the critical point. The changes which we are making here will remove duplication and complexity. It will make it easier for New Zealand businesses to get New Zealand Government contracts.

SPEAKER: OK.

Hon SIMON WATTS: That is good for New Zealand.

SPEAKER: Good. That's enough.

Hon SIMON WATTS: That is good for—

SPEAKER: That is quite enough.

Hon SIMON WATTS: —New Zealand workers.

SPEAKER: That's enough. Is there another supplementary question?

Question No. 2—Revenue

2. PAULO GARCIA (National—New Lynn) to the Minister of Revenue: What recent announcements has he made on the foreign investment fund rules?

Hon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue): Well, New Zealand should be a place where talented people want to invest and grow businesses, but right now our tax rules are making that harder. Good news: we are fixing that. Yesterday, I announced the Government's proposed changes to the foreign investment fund rules, including the addition of a new method to calculate a person's taxable foreign investment fund income. This change will remove a tax barrier that is stopping highly skilled migrants and, importantly, returning Kiwis from investing here.

Paulo Garcia: Why is the change so critical to facilitating foreign investments into New Zealand?

Hon SIMON WATTS: Well, the current system hits new migrants and returning Kiwis unfairly, especially those in the tech and startup sectors where still some migrants, particularly US citizens, risk double taxation. We want New Zealand to be an attractive place to live and work in and these changes will make that easier.

Paulo Garcia: What reaction has he seen to this announcement?

Hon SIMON WATTS: We are hosting the investment summit in Auckland this week and we have had extremely positive feedback from the tech and startup sectors. Graeme Muller, the chief executive from NZTech, said that "these improvements in tax rules are exactly what we need to make New Zealand more attractive for both investors and global talents." Similarly, Robbie Paul, the CEO of Icehouse Ventures, has said "this is a stand-up example of Government engaging on a genuine issue so we can all create … brighter future[s] for New Zealand[ers]."

Paulo Garcia: What plans are there, if any, for existing residents?

Hon SIMON WATTS: Well, the Government is looking at broader foreign investment fund reforms, including how these rules affect residents, including whether the tax thresholds should be raised and how we can support investment visas. We want to unlock investment and growth, and I'm looking forward to having more to say on that later this year.

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: Does he agree with National MP Dr Vanessa Weenink, who, when voting against the Crimes (Theft by Employer) Amendment Bill, said, "When you make something a criminal offence, does it really deter people?" or New Zealand First MP Mark Patterson, who, when voting for that bill, said, "There should be consequences for a crime. We fundamentally believe that, and this bill does provide that deterrence factor."?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Well, the great thing about this side of the House is that we allow people to think for themselves. We don't have the old rule 242, which says that the party's conscience is your conscience, and, therefore, I tend to agree with both members.

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Does he agree with New Zealand First that people should be held accountable for their crimes or is he satisfied leading a National Party that is soft on white-collar crime?

SPEAKER: Just a point there. Have a go at asking the question. I won't take one off you, but that is not a question the Prime Minister can possibly be responsible for.

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Does he agree with New Zealand First that people should be held accountable for their crimes or is he satisfied leading a Government that is soft on white-collar crime?

SPEAKER: Well, strictly speaking, you can't make that last statement either. Given that I've been pretty hard on the Māori Party—

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: I can handle it.

SPEAKER: I know the willingness of the member to answer any question that's ever asked of him, but I think, just playing by the rules—once again, just ask the question without the last bit.

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Does he agree with New Zealand First that people should be held accountable for their crimes, or is it just some people?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: We have always agreed, on this side of the House, that people should be held accountable for their crimes. Otherwise, you'd get a thing called anarchy and the utter destruction of democracy and freedom and liberty. And, on the other side of the thing on the question of white-collar crime, look at the person who took on the wine-box inquiry, who, against all odds, and won.

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Should security guards and cleaners employed at Parliament continue to be guaranteed a living wage?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Well, the reality is that they're on a contract which does just that. The contract cannot be changed.

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: If security guards and cleaners in Parliament are to receive a living wage, shouldn't all Government contracted security guards and cleaners be provided the same assurance?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The reality is that the people we're talking about have all got representation. They've got agencies that work for them, and someone that worked and was a delegate for the most lowly union in this country, the Labourers Union. We know something about that, and we've got a record, of course, having gone for the minimum wage at a higher level than any other party. Now, my point is, what we want to do is make sure that the conflated mess that is this matter is tidied up so that people can get on getting employed and getting paid properly. And they will be.

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Is it appropriate that those security guards should now be paid minimum wage at the same time they have been asked to perform the Police's job with enhanced powers to perform citizens arrests, therefore putting them in harm's way?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Well, if the member begins with the premise that is false, then she'll get the false conclusion that she has just arrived at. That is not the case at all.

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Why is this Government focused on reducing incomes for security guards and cleaners and defending employers who steal money from their workers at a time when Kiwis are struggling to put food on their tables?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: We'll begin with—the Government is not allowing employers to steal from their workers. That's clear, if the member did the numbers, where things are going on that matter. So that's number one put right. And the other matter is to do with their present, existing contracts, which will be maintained. So why this alarmism? We do not understand.

Question No. 4—Oceans and Fisheries

4. TEANAU TUIONO (Green) to the Minister for Oceans and Fisheries: What steps, if any, has he taken to guard against regulatory capture of the Ministry for Primary Industries by New Zealand's commercial fishing sector?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Deputy Prime Minister) on behalf of the Minister for Oceans and Fisheries: Regrettably, we have to reject the premise of the member's question. The inference that the Director-General of the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) and the Deputy Director-General responsible for fisheries are anything other than public servants of the highest integrity is deeply insulting and just plain wrong. However, the Minister has set a clear expectation that MPI engages with a wide range of stakeholders in formulating its advice and managing fisheries, and that takes appropriate compliance action when and where justified.

Teanau Tuiono: Can the Minister explain why, after a New Zealand bottom trawler owned by Westfleet dredged up protected coral triggering a fisheries closure, Fisheries New Zealand refused to release coordinates of the incident to environmental organisations, despite providing it to industry, only for the Australian Government to provide the information?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Again, the member misspeaks and is mistaken. The coordinates in terms of the total area were given. Of course, what they were seeking was the exact area where it happened, but that's not the request that they made. So if the Australians were being helpful, fine, but the reality is that the original request was met and accepting they were expecting the Ministry to somehow do all the work whilst they went there—Greenpeace—and showed off.

Teanau Tuiono: Will he commit to working with Australia on the creation of a marine protected area to allow the region to recover if it's found by a Greenpeace survey of the region that areas critical for marine life have been decimated by New Zealand bottom trawlers?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Well, clearly, we will not be relying upon the Greenpeace survey, we'll do our survey ourselves. At the moment, that area is isolated, not being used, not being fished for that very reason.

Teanau Tuiono: Will the Minister or his officials attend the Australian Government and WWF research symposium which aims to create a high-seas marine protected area in the location where the coral bycatch took place, and if not, why not?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Well, I suppose the first thing that one would expect to answer that question was that we got an invitation. So we'll check it out and see what the answer is when we get an invitation. We don't just bluff our way in and front up and bust through the doors like some political parties that I know.

Teanau Tuiono: Given New Zealand is the last nation on earth bottom trawling the South Pacific, what's more important: the ability of the industry to harvest the last remaining orange roughy in the region or the integrity of vulnerable marine ecosystems?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The reality is that it is almost four decades since this country set a standard with respect to fishing quotas and fishing bycatch, and all of the areas around the world that have a fishing interest have always been in admiration of this country's position. Nothing has changed, but we will not start at shadows; we are measuring the stock and allowing the appropriate ratio of fishing to take place.

Question No. 5—Workplace Relations and Safety

5. Hon GINNY ANDERSEN (Labour) to the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety: Does she agree with Brooke van Velden's statement, "I think a lot of people in New Zealand do live on minimum wage and we have to allow people to make ends meet"; if so, how many Government contractors are currently paid the minimum wage?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety): Yes, in the context in which it was made, which was an RNZ interview titled "ACT: need more jobs rather than raising min wage". If the member had listened to the full context of the interview, she would note that I'm not in favour of large increases to the minimum wage but policies that support an economy where people have jobs to go to rather than people shutting up shop. I want to make it easier for business owners to actually take a chance on someone and give them a job. In response to the second part of your question, this is not my ministerial responsibility.

Hon Ginny Andersen: How does removing the requirement for cleaners, caterers, and security guards to be paid the living wage help to increase the incomes of some of our hardest-working New Zealanders?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: It is not my responsibility to be talking about procurement contracts of this Government.

Hon Ginny Andersen: Does she support New Zealand First MP Andy Foster's public commitment to maintaining the living wage; if not, why not?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: Like my colleague Winston Peters has articulated quite nicely in the House, members on this side of the Government are entitled to their individual opinions.

Hon Ginny Andersen: What impact will cutting workers' wages by over $370 a fortnight, during a cost of living crisis, have on child poverty, homelessness, and demand for food banks, and has she received any advice on this?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: I thank the member for her question. In regards to things like the minimum wage as a floor for employee rights in New Zealand, I've had advice that the minimum wage is not a good redistribution tool for poverty reduction. This Government, alongside other previous Governments, have used more targeted responses to reduce poverty—things like the accommodation supplement, things like Working for Families, FamilyBoost. Having the minimum wage standard is not a poverty reduction tool; it is simply a floor for wages in this country.

Hon Ginny Andersen: Does she believe that employers intentionally withholding wages from workers constitutes theft?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: What I do believe is that we already have civil law in New Zealand that allows for people to be paid correctly by their employer. The Labour Party's member's bill is not necessary for people to be paid correctly. But what I'd also say is perhaps the member would like to have some conversations with people that I've been speaking to recently—for example, one cafe owner that I met, just in this last week, who sold her car and her husband's bike to keep her own employees employed. There aren't just good and bad people; there are people trying to make ends meet who are workers and business owners.

Teanau Tuiono: Is the minimum wage enough for workers to make ends meet, and if not, why not?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: I can't talk about any particular individual circumstance that any particular person may have in this country. People's lives are far too complex to try and make that simple. But what I can say is that it's very widely understood that the minimum wage is not a poverty reduction tool. We have policies across this Government that even previous Governments used, like Working for Families, like the targeted accommodation supplement. We should be there to help people in desperate need, but not to have across-the-board policies where we can target people who genuinely need it.

SPEAKER: I'll just make the point that the Government should not be interjecting on their own Ministers who are answering questions.

Hon Ginny Andersen: Does her Government's Going For Growth strategy just apply for unemployment queues and lines for the food bank?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: I'm not responsible for the Going For Growth strategy. That question is best responded to by the Minister for Economic Growth.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Can I ask the Minister as to whether she shares the view that anyone who goes to a worksite and puts it in a fair day's work, five days a week or longer, is a worker, not just one group of people?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: I do agree. I have huge respect for people who get up every day and provide for themselves and provide for their families. There are a lot of very, very hard-working Kiwis in this country, and I respect all of them.

Question No. 6—Health

6. KATIE NIMON (National—Napier) to the Associate Minister of Health: What recent announcements has he made on refreshing New Zealand's eating disorders strategy?

Hon MATT DOOCEY (Associate Minister of Health): As part of Eating Disorders Awareness Week I recently announced that the Government would be refreshing New Zealand's eating disorders strategy. The refreshed strategy will have clear and prioritised actions for implementation. Other focuses will include identifying where further efforts across eating disorder services are required and improving our understanding of eating disorder data. It will also include opportunities to grow and utilise the peer support workforce more. We know we can do a lot better in supporting individuals and their families who are struggling to get support.

Katie Nimon: Why does the eating disorders strategy need to be refreshed?

Hon MATT DOOCEY: Around 2,000 people access support for an eating disorder every year, and approximately 1,500 or three-quarters of these will be young people under the age of 25, but we know there will be more need. New Zealand's strategy has not been refreshed in 16 years, with the last strategy published in 2008. It is long overdue for an update. A 2021 review by the ministry showed that demand for eating disorder services has risen significantly since the strategy was first published over a decade ago.

Katie Nimon: What feedback has the Minister seen from eating disorder groups?

Hon MATT DOOCEY: Sarah Rowland, co-chair of the Eating Disorders Carer Support New Zealand said, "The strategy will be a significant step towards improving prevention, early intervention, treatment accessibility, and long-term recovery support.", while Rebecca Toms from WithLoveED said, "I just wanted to say thank you for paying attention to the critical issue of eating disorders in New Zealand. You know it means a lot to families like mine to see this issue finally receiving the recognition at a national level."

Katie Nimon: What other feedback has the Minister seen?

Hon MATT DOOCEY: I have a message by Bex, the mother of a child with an eating disorder. She said, "This makes me so happy. As a parent who almost lost her 16-year-old son to an eating disorder, the fight I had against the system almost broke me. I'm happy for families and people in the future who will get the support earlier." Lisa from Christchurch messaged me and said, "This is so overdue. So very glad this is happening. There are way too many families struggling to care for loved ones with this disorder." And Joseph messaged me, saying, "More people suffer from eating disorders that we realise. A lot of men as well. This is good news."

Question No. 7—Agriculture

7. STEVE ABEL (Green) to the Minister of Agriculture: Does he agree that trade access to overseas markets is a key component of protecting the export performance of New Zealand's agricultural sector?

Hon NICOLA GRIGG (Associate Minister of Agriculture) on behalf of the Minister of Agriculture: Yes.

Steve Abel: Does he agree with advice from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade on the Gene Technology Bill that "The regulator should be required to consider trade and market access risks in assessing organisms for environmental release. This is due to the complex assurance processes for gene technology in key export markets, and the unpredictable nature of the international trading environment where gene technology has been historically controversial."?

Hon NICOLA GRIGG: Like any of the other 26,000 submissions on this bill, I do expect the select committee to assess robustly all of the points that have been made by various submitters, and I look forward to the report back from that committee.

Steve Abel: What specific actions will the Minister take to address concerns from the Dairy Companies Association of New Zealand: "In addition to variety of country requirements, there are significant customer requirements for demonstrating that products and/or supply chains are non-GMO. These requirements vary greatly. None the less, New Zealand dairy exporters are present easily meet these requirements by reference to the fact that the New Zealand environment is, effectively, non-GMO."?

Hon NICOLA GRIGG: I'm advised that, actually, there is no evidence that the liberalisation of gene tech rules will affect New Zealand's trade, given that many countries that we trade with are already trading in GE products, including, of course, Australia. I'd also note for the House that the co-existence of organic and GM crops will need to be managed, and the question that the select committee will need to consider, one would assume, is as to whether that is managed through the proposed gene technology Act or by other mechanisms such as industry self-regulation.

Steve Abel: What specific actions will the Minister take to address Fonterra's recommendation that risks to trade and market access should be included in the bill's architecture, given the potential for the significant impacts gene technologies may have on New Zealand's business and their ability to access international markets with their products?

Hon NICOLA GRIGG: On behalf of the Minister, as has already been canvassed, the bill is currently being examined by the Health Committee, so I would expect that any specific actions taken by the Minister would come about as a result of the committee's report and, indeed, its recommendations.

Steve Abel: How concerned is the Minister at the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research finding that the environmental release of GMOs in New Zealand could reduce exports from the primary sector by up to $10 billion to $20 billion annually?

Hon NICOLA GRIGG: I am aware of that report, but, as I have already canvassed in the House, the co-existence of organic and GM crops already exists and, indeed, will need to be managed. Again, we do look forward to the committee's consideration of the submissions, and we look forward to their report and recommendations.

Steve Abel: How seriously is the Minister taking the calls from the primary production sector—including the dairy industry, Federated Farmers, Horticulture New Zealand, Beef + Lamb, the lobster and pāua industries, Seafood New Zealand, New Zealand Winegrowers, and the seed and grain companies—for trade and market risks of GMOs to be addressed in the bill?

Hon NICOLA GRIGG: Of course we take very seriously feedback from the industry, which, I think, is why the industry has demonstrated such confidence in this Government as opposed to the previous Government, but what I would also note for the House is that the value of New Zealand's agricultural products is based on more than just gene technology. We have an incredibly high reputation for high-quality, safe, sustainable food and fibre, and I would also note that on this side of the House, we place a lot of faith in the commercial decisions made by companies. Those that might choose to develop and market a product using gene technology will be doing so because there is a demonstrated commercial return.

Question No. 8—Small Business and Manufacturing

8. DAVID MacLEOD (National—New Plymouth) to the Minister for Small Business and Manufacturing: What is the Government doing to support small businesses and manufacturers?

Hon CHRIS PENK (Minister for Small Business and Manufacturing): This Government is working hard to grow the economy, particularly for small businesses and manufacturers. This includes the promotion of e-invoicing. The productivity gains, the efficiency gains, and the protection against fraud are all key reasons that we are doing so. Recently, a key milestone of 50,000 businesses across New Zealand was reached for the uptake of e-invoicing, and we are asking—requiring, in fact—Government agencies to play a leadership role in adopting that technology, as well.

David MacLeod: Is finding skilled workers a challenge for small businesses, and what is the Government doing about it?

Hon CHRIS PENK: It can indeed be a challenge, and we know that access to talent is a key enabler of small business and manufacturing growth. Our key three pillars of ensuring that they have opportunities in this space include reform of the education system, with a strong emphasis on numeracy and literacy; in the vocational education space, improving and rationalising that sector for much more efficient outcomes; and, where needed, targeted specific gaps can be filled with skilled immigration. So I acknowledge and thank colleagues Stanford, Simmonds, and Stanford, respectively, for their work in that space.

David MacLeod: What impact will the recent proposed changes to procurement rules have on New Zealand manufacturers?

Hon CHRIS PENK: The proposed new rules for Government procurement could be a game-changer for small businesses and manufacturing, with some $50 billion worth of Government contracts annually having an easier path to comply with the procurement rules. For example, removing some 24 specific hoops to jump through and replacing them with a more general economic benefit will be huge. The manufacturing sector accounts for 8.4 percent of GDP in this country and employs around 10 percent of our workforce.

David MacLeod: How will the investment summit benefit small businesses and manufacturers?

Hon CHRIS PENK: There are a couple of key ways that it will help to increase economic growth in this country—which, as you know, is this Government's—

Hon Judith Collins: Space.

Hon CHRIS PENK: —watchword. One is to unlock opportunities for that extra capital to invest in plant and equipment and, in turn, be able to grow and export back out to the world, and, second, by investing in infrastructure, we'll make it easier and quicker, as well as safer, for firms, farms, and families to be connected with those goods and services. And, for bonus point No. 3, I'm reminded by my colleague and friend Judith Collins—

Hon Judith Collins: Space.

Hon CHRIS PENK: —space.

Question No. 9—Rail

9. TANGI UTIKERE (Labour—Palmerston North) to the Minister for Rail: Has the Government received any alternative proposals for the procurement of new Cook Strait ferries from the private sector; if so, how many?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Minister for Rail): Yes, we have had strong interest from the private sector, and we thank them for that—for their contributions, equities, and ideas. As for any details, the House will need to wait until Cabinet has been briefed, but let me remind the member that we have a task to do to tidy the issues of a $3.1 billion project that started with a Government contribution of $400.1 million, and then Treasury began warning the Government, the past Government, in 2023, that this project was going to blow out to over $4 billion. So we're working on it and very soon, in a few weeks, we'll give the member the answer he wants.

Tangi Utikere: Will he seriously consider alternative options from the private sector for the procurement of ferry services, or does he still consider private sector involvement "just ridiculous"?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The reality is we're looking at every option all around the world, from, dare I say it, China, Korea, all the way to Scandinavia.

Tangi Utikere: Will the Government's Cook Strait's ferry service be privatised under his watch?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: I think I can give you a firm promise: under my watch, no.

Tangi Utikere: Will his Government pay for the required portside infrastructure upgrades that will be needed for any new ferries?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Well, the reality is, that's a fascinating question and I'm so pleased that very sensible member asked it, because that's what the problem was with the last contract: for every one dollar we were going to spend on the ferry, $4 was going to the infrastructure, and that was impossible. So what we're doing here is looking at the infrastructure of the future, and he will know that Port Marlborough has got a certain contribution to make, the Wellington port has got a certain contribution to make, and we're looking at how we best can make this work, reusing as much as we possibly can, which our forefathers had in mind when they were insightful runners of this Parliament.

Tangi Utikere: What communications, if any, has he had with Hyundai since his meeting with them on 28 February 2025, and, if so, what were those communications about?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: I wrote a letter thanking them for their gracious respect in giving us their time and their expertise for a very, very meaningful discussion, which adds to the quality of information we have in making a decision as a Cabinet going forward.

Tangi Utikere: Does the Minister agree with David Seymour that "Private investment will bring private market discipline which will lead to a better and more cost-effective service in years to come.", or will the privatisation of the ferry service be another disaster, this time with him at the helm?

Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: It is not the history of somebody that's at the helm ever being in charge of a disaster—quite the consequence; pointing out disasters, yes, but not starting them. In respect of Mr Seymour's comment, that is a view, but then if you have a look at the Singaporean Temasek model, where they've use the best of business expertise in the interests of the nation and their savings programme, it has been a brilliant success and I do think that there are members on this side of the House who believe we need it here in our country.

Question No. 10—Health

10. JENNY MARCROFT (NZ First) to the Associate Minister of Health: What recent announcements has she made regarding upgrades to New Zealand's air ambulance fleet?

Hon CASEY COSTELLO (Associate Minister of Health): Yesterday, I had the pleasure, with the Minister for ACC, Scott Simpson, to announce that a brand new air ambulance helicopter is now in service for the people across the Waikato, Coromandel, and King Country. This is great news for the region and the hard-working local MPs who have so strongly advocated for an upgraded helicopter. This new helicopter offers improved safety, a more reliable service, better capacity to respond in bad weather conditions, reduced maintenance cost, greater fuel efficiency, and better operational performance. Mr Speaker, if you'd indulge me, I would also like to acknowledge the unwavering commitment of Central Air Ambulance Rescue Limited and the trusts, organisations, and individuals who collaborate so effectively to deliver these critical services.

SPEAKER: That's fine; I'm sure answers will be concise from here.

Jenny Marcroft: Why are upgrades to the air ambulance fleet needed?

Hon CASEY COSTELLO: The helicopter fleet is currently the oldest in the developed world. This creates sustainability and reliability risks and means that our excellent paramedics, doctors, and nurses providing treatment to patients have had to do so in constraints of the existing fleet. In addition to our ageing fleet, emergency air ambulance helicopter services have come under increasing demand, which has grown more than 20 percent over the last five years. In the last calendar year alone, the emergency air ambulance fleet flew 13,309 hours, an average of more than 36 flight hours each day. Meeting this growing demand and ensuring patients can receive the best care in their time of need is essential and requires a fleet that can spend more time in the air.

Jenny Marcroft: When can New Zealanders expect more upgrades to the air ambulance fleet?

Hon CASEY COSTELLO: This Government has allocated an additional $14.7 million to be invested in this to enable air ambulance service providers to replace nine ageing helicopters with newer ones. On top of the brand new helicopter announced yesterday and one that's been operational in Tauranga from mid - last year, at this stage, we are looking at a near-new helicopter to be operational in Auckland from mid-April, and three more helicopters are expected to arrive in New Zealand by the end of May. Announcements about these upgrades and further ones will be made in due course.

Question No. 11—Hunting and Fishing

11. MILES ANDERSON (National—Waitaki) to the Minister for Hunting and Fishing: What work has the Government done to support the hunting and fishing community?

Hon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing): As a Government, we are strongly committed to supporting the hunting and fishing community and maximising the value of hunting and fishing as a cultural and economic resource for New Zealand. As an example, at the start of this month, the Government approved three new commercial upland game preserves. These are Mangakahia in Whangārei, Lagoon Hill in southern Wairarapa, and Grange Hill in the mighty South Canterbury. Game preserves currently constitute a $7 million per year industry, and this announcement will provide economic growth and a further boost to the sector. This is just a small part of this Government's ambitious hunting and fishing work programme.

Miles Anderson: How else is this Government supporting the hunting and fishing community?

Hon JAMES MEAGER: Since becoming the new Minister for Hunting and Fishing, I have met with all 12 Fish & Game regional councils around the country as well as Fish & Game New Zealand, the Game Animal Council, New Zealand Deerstalkers Association, and many other passionate hunters. Their views reinforce the importance of progressing work on things like herds of special interest, recognising valued introduced species as a resource rather than a pest, improving access to public land through the Access Charter for Recreational Hunting and Fishing, investing in huts of recreational importance by supporting the community hut programme, and supporting and modernising Fish & Game New Zealand.

Miles Anderson: What are the Minister's priorities in his portfolio?

Hon JAMES MEAGER: As Minister for Hunting and Fishing, my number one priority is to make it as easy as possible for New Zealanders to go hunting and fishing. Our hunters and anglers are one of our biggest conservation resources, which is why we have invested significant funds in partnering with hunters to undertake animal management programmes throughout New Zealand, particularly in the South Island. We will never be able to manage our conservation land and improve our biodiversity without the work and support of hunters and fishers. I am proud to be the Minister for Hunting and Fishing. I am looking forward to working with Opposition spokesperson for hunting and fishing, Scott Willis, on how we can further support the great work of hunters and anglers.

Cameron Luxton: Supplementary.

SPEAKER: Hang on—hang on. Sorry, just a minute. The primary question gets three supplementaries and then we go to everyone else. I've held that rule right from the start.

Miles Anderson: How can people get involved in hunting and fishing?

Hon JAMES MEAGER: From today, game bird licences go on sale across the country and the duck shooting season starts on 3 May. I know that the member, alongside myself, will be keen to get out on the maimai. Also starting this month is the roar, with the opening of the red deer hunting season. I wish all hunters a successful season and I also encourage everyone to stay safe and following the seven rules of firearms safety.

Cameron Luxton: Assuming the Minister is acknowledging the vital role that hunters play in conservation, does he agree that granting them greater involvement in decision making would lead to better conservation outcomes?

Hon JAMES MEAGER: Absolutely. The contribution that our hunting community makes to conservation is invaluable, alongside the contribution by our anglers, who also undertake wetland restoration and fisheries maintenance across the country. I want hunters at the table and I am very keen to explore how we can ensure that hunters and anglers have a say in managing our valuable conservation land. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: I don't know what the excitement is, but the Minister is doing quite well without that assistance.

Hon Damien O'Connor: Oh, I don't know about that!

SPEAKER: I do.

Question No. 12—Commerce and Consumer Affairs

12. ARENA WILLIAMS (Labour—Manurewa) to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs: How will the Government back up its promise to ensure fair prices for Kiwi consumers?

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs): Increasing competition is a key pillar of this Government's going for growth plan. Having better competition means that we can bring down the cost of living for Kiwis and lift living standards. That's why I'm progressing an ambitious review of New Zealand's competition settings, which includes, amongst other things, the first major review of the Commerce Act in more than two decades. Getting these core settings right is important as greater competition will lead to more innovation and fairer prices for all Kiwis.

Arena Williams: Will this Government take action on the big banks charging Kiwis more right now, after 18 months of posturing and as a defiant ANZ, recording its most profitable quarter ever, is making $10 million a day from New Zealanders?

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: As the member will well know, the Finance and Expenditure Committee is currently conducting an inquiry into banking, and the member will need to just wait and see what recommendations come from that committee. But she can be well assured that this Government is keeping a very careful eye on banks.

Arena Williams: When will Kiwis see their power prices coming down, given that they are going up next month?

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: Power prices are crucial to New Zealanders and, as that member will well know, we have an infrastructure shortage in terms of power generation. So this Government is intending to make it easier for new generation to occur, particularly renewable generation. So the key to this question is in fact getting electricity supply right and the value right for all New Zealanders.

Arena Williams: Is there anything in the Government's plan for commerce and consumers that will make a trolley of groceries cheaper?

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: Well, this is interesting because the member also will be well aware that my predecessor had the supermarket duopoly firmly in his sights. But the member will also be very clear that I have proactively, in accordance with the Cabinet Manual, recused myself because of a conflict to be involved in any matters relating to supermarkets or groceries. Those matters will be handled by none other than the Hon Nicola Willis, and I can think of no better Minister to do that.

Arena Williams: Has Air New Zealand hiked fares for some routes by up to 300 percent in five years, and, if so, why have Government MPs blocked Labour's select committee inquiry into airlines? [Interruption]

SPEAKER: Sorry, just a minute.

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: Well, airline prices—

SPEAKER: Hold on. It's not part of your responsibility. Do you want to ask the question in a different way?

Arena Williams: Has Air New Zealand hiked fares for some routes by up to 300 percent in five years, and, if so, would he support an inquiry at select committee into airlines?

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: The pricing mechanism that Air New Zealand uses is, of course, a matter entirely for Air New Zealand. That said, like all New Zealanders, I'm looking forward to greater competition on our airways and the opportunities that that will provide for lowering airfares and making better value air flights for all New Zealanders.

Arena Williams: Why is he sitting back while New Zealanders are charged more by the banks, they pay more for their power, and they can't get around the country?

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: Well, it's very difficult to take a lecture from a member of that party on issues relating to that sort. They had six long years to attend to these matters. They saw inflation out of control, they saw costs out of control, and the net result was that New Zealanders had a crisis of confidence in that Government. Our Government is standing up for all New Zealanders. We're getting the economy going, we're going for growth, and we're back on track. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: I'm sure everyone's feeling a lot better for that little blow out. I've asked members on a daily basis that when we come to the end of questions, those who have to go off to other activities around the place to do so quickly, quietly, and without conversations. I'll invite you to do it now, and I mean without conversations on the way out.

I declare the House in committee for further consideration of the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2024–25, Emergency Response, and Remedial Measures) Bill.

© Scoop Media