Sitting date: 8 April 2025

ORAL QUESTIONS

QUESTIONS TO MINISTERS

Question No. 1—Prime Minister

1. 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 can I also just acknowledge, while I'm on my feet, the retirement of David Parker? Can I say, while we may have disagreed on different things politically, that you have huge respect across the House, and that, actually, we want to thank you for your service to this House and to this place, and importantly, also, for the intellect and the passion. We want to wish you well for your future—well done.

SPEAKER: Well, that's very nice. Can we go to question No. 2 now, or—

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Supplementary, Mr Speaker. Does he agree with his Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs' statement, with regard to the previous National Government signing New Zealand up to the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, "They've never told you what the target is or whether it's capable of being met"; if not, why not?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, what I know is that it's important, and in our national interest, to meet that commitment, and that's what you've seen this coalition Government do. The farmers that I've talked to up and down this country, they tell me, very clearly, they don't want multinational companies or competing countries kicking New Zealand products off the shelf. We want farmers doing exceptionally well in this country, and we want this economy pumping.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Does he agree with his Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs' statement, with regard to China's, India's, and Russia's membership of the Paris Agreement, "Why on earth we're doing this, when other countries are not doing this?"; if not, why not?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: This is a coalition Government that is going hard on economic growth because it is in our national interest to do so. We are always going to put Kiwis first, and that is going to be primary in all of our decision making. As I said, we're not going to punish our farmers. We want our economy growing, and that's why we meet those commitments.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Does he agree with his Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs' statement that honouring our Paris Agreement obligations will result in "Transferring $22 maybe $32 billion out of our economy in the next few years to try to satisfy our woke ambitions is just catastrophic"; if not, why not?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I can reassure the member that we won't be doing that. What we are doing is making sure that we are keeping our commitments, because we know that it punishes our farmers. And our farmers tell us that multinational companies and competing countries would love nothing more than to have New Zealand products kicked off the shelf. That's why it's in our brutal national interest to do so. We want agriculture pumping. We want the economy growing.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Is he comfortable that international media are now reporting that the New Zealand Government is considering pulling out of the Paris Agreement because of statements his current Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs has made, and statements that his next Deputy Prime Minister has been making.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I'll just say that is not, as I understand, what the Deputy Prime Minister has said, and that is not how I would characterise that position. I think everybody understands that it is in our brutal national interest—that's why this coalition Government has said that we will meet our commitments, and that's why we are staying in Paris, because we want our farmers to do well. We are not going to punish our farmers, and we're not going to send farming out of this country, like the last Labour - Green Government was proposing to do.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Can he name one major policy change his Government has made that has actually reduced New Zealand's climate emissions; if so, what is it?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I can name several of them. But I would just say to that member: we want to end the oil and gas ban; we want that member to support fast-track legislation—but they didn't. Why? Because 22 projects enabled a 30 percent increase in renewable electricity—that's a good thing. But if the member really cared about these issues, instead of pretending that he does, he would have backed the fast-track legislation; he would back ending the oil and gas ban and a number of things that this Government's doing to get the country growing.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Does the Prime Minister not think it's just axiomatic that if China, India, the United States, and Russia were signed up—that's almost 60 percent of the emissions in this world at the moment—then targets could be met?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I think the Deputy Prime Minister understands that we are doing everything we can to meet our commitments, but we are not going to bankrupt New Zealand by running our farmers down, by not having them sell their products internationally, and we are making sure that we get agriculture pumping and the economy growing.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Does he think it enhances or diminishes New Zealand's international reputation as a clean, green economy when his Minister of Foreign Affairs indicates that New Zealand was wrong to sign the Paris Agreement, travels to the Pacific—one of the regions of the world most affected by climate change—and questions the global scientific consensus on climate change, and his Government dismantles almost all proactive action to reduce New Zealand's emissions?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: We have some crocodile tears from the Leader of the Opposition, because I am incredibly proud of our foreign Minister, and he is out there in the world doing the business for New Zealand. He is hugely respected by everybody in the foreign affairs community, and I am very proud of the work that he's doing. I just would compare and contrast his record versus your record in Government.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Gerry was a good foreign affairs Minister!

SPEAKER: Yeah, but I wasn't part of your Government. There—I've broken my neutrality, how bad's that? Chlöe Swarbrick.

Question No. 2—Prime Minister

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

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

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Prime Minister): Yes.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Is climate change one of the biggest threats facing Aotearoa New Zealand?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, the major one that we're facing right now is actually economic growth. That's why this Government is prioritising economic growth above and beyond everything else, because we want working New Zealanders to be able to work hard, to get money in their back pocket, and to do well.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Why did his Government choose to cut $2.4 billion on climate mitigation when the New Zealand Defence Force themselves have identified climate change is one of the biggest risks we face to national security?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I don't quite understand the member's question, but what I would say is who are the people that show up in climate-related disasters and emergencies across the Pacific? It is our defence force. They are the people that show up in the helicopters helping the Pacific Island nations, helping New Zealanders that are desperately in need. So I would hope that that member gets in behind supporting the defence plan that we signed off for yesterday. I note that the Labour Party has said that they are up for more defence spending. I've heard the defund defence narrative on top of the defund the police narrative from the degrowth Greens, but actually it is the defence forces that show up and look after our people and the people in the Pacific because of their abilities, and their capabilities, and the assets that they have.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Does the Prime Minister understand the difference between responding to the climate crisis and active investment and policies to prevent the climate crisis getting worse, which his Government has cut?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: As that member would be well aware, we have our Emissions Reduction Plan 2 Budget and plan, which suggests that our Government is actually on track to deliver Net Carbon Zero potentially six years earlier. So we can meet our commitments but most importantly, we are going to grow our economy because right now—and just the events of this week underscore yet again that economic growth is the way that we look after New Zealanders and we set up them for a great future.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Can the Prime Minister explain why his social development Minister said it was "unrealistic" to spend $3 billion to lift 80,000 children out of poverty, yet his Government has found $3 billion a year for military spending?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I'll just say to that member, you and your party were part of a Government that had put 23,000 more kids into poverty in the last year of your Government. Our Budget last year identified that it would lift 17,000 children out of poverty. I just would say it's all rather sanctimonious to talk about values, but you actually have to follow it up with actions and that's what we're doing with our defence plan.

Chlöe Swarbrick: Why will the Government bend its own self-imposed fiscal management rules to spend billions and billions more on military capability, but refuse to do the same to guarantee that everyone has a safe future, like with expenditure on healthcare, social development, and education?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: We are not doing that. That is a mischaracterisation in that question of our position. But what we are doing is making sure that we can secure prosperity through security. It's actually important. If you have a set of values, you don't just go around the world talking about them, you actually show up and actually do your part and pull your weight. We are doing that with this investment in defence. Again, I just say to that member, go talk to people in the Pacific, talk to the Pacific Island leaders that have come out in support of our defence plan, because they understand what that means in climate-related weather events that actually cause havoc across the Pacific. We are actually making sure that we've got the assets to respond to our own New Zealanders in need and people in the Pacific too.

Question No. 3—Finance

3. CAMERON BREWER (National—Upper Harbour) to the Minister of Finance: What recent advice has she received about the potential impact of global uncertainty on New Zealand's economy?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance): Earlier today, I hosted a briefing about the Government's latest assessment of what the United States' new tariff regime, and the global response to it, means for the New Zealand economy. I am receiving ongoing updates from Treasury advisers about this unfolding situation. Though unwelcome, the tariffs that have been imposed on New Zealand are likely to be modest in comparison with the impact for many other countries. The most significant impact for New Zealand of the current uncertainty will be through disruptions to the global economy.

Cameron Brewer: How could New Zealand's economy be affected?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: New Zealand is strong and resilient, but ours is a small, globally connected economy. When big international events happen, they affect us too. There remains a high degree of uncertainty about what will happen in coming weeks and months. The Asian region, including Australia, accounts for 70 percent of New Zealand's international trade. There is a risk of slower growth in the region because many economies there have significant exposures to the new US tariff regime. We could also anticipate trade diversion effects and impacts on supply chains. All of these factors create risk for the New Zealand economy, just as we have been gathering positive momentum and recovering from an earlier period of high inflation and high interest rates.

Cameron Brewer: What does this mean for Treasury's Budget forecasts?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Treasury is currently finalising its forecasts for the Budget 2025. It usually bases its forecasts for world growth and inflation on consensus forecasts. At the half-year update, trading partner growth was already forecast to be modest—at around 2.5 percent in the June '26 year. Following the recent tariff announcements, Treasury's initial assessment is that partner growth will be closer to 2 percent in the 2026 year. Similarly, at the half-year update, global inflation was forecast at 2.5 percent in the June '26 year. Treasury's current assessment is that global inflation could rise by as much as 0.5 percent in that year. Slowing global demand is likely to reduce demand for our exports and lower business investment.

Cameron Brewer: How is the Government responding to this?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: While there are risks to our economy, there are also reasons to feel confident that we have the right settings and policies in place to get through this period of uncertainty. The Government plans to stick to our fiscal strategy, including remaining with our intention to endeavour to return the books to an operating balance before gains and losses excluding ACC gains and losses surplus in the 2027-28 fiscal year, and to continue our efforts to reduce net debt. We do not intend to exceed the operating allowances forecast at the half-year update. We were already preparing Budget 2025 to be a growth Budget, and that remains the case. The past week's global developments will make our recovery harder, but our goal is to steer our economy through these choppy waters in a way that limits the damage for New Zealanders. We will continue to provide responsible economic management that supports job creation, rising incomes, and a more affordable cost of living for New Zealanders.

Question No. 4—Finance

4. Hon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour—Mana) to the Minister of Finance: Does she stand by her statement, "So yes, there are global headwinds but actually New Zealand's pretty well positioned to navigate our way forward", and what is the expected effect of the United States tariffs on the New Zealand economy?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS (Minister of Finance): Yes, I do stand by that statement, which, I note, was made before the United States outlined its new tariff regime. New Zealand's economy is recovering from an earlier period of high inflation and high interest rates. The past week's global developments will make our recovery harder. There will be direct and indirect impacts on our economy, such as exporters being affected by tariffs that make it harder for them to sell into the US market. The most significant impact will be through disruptions to the global economy, potentially seen in slower growth in the Asian region, trade diversion effects, and impacts on supply chains.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: How can New Zealand exporters trust her "stay the course" plan in relation to US tariffs when the Government's position is that it "could have been worse", and that they have not corrected the assumption that New Zealand imposes a 20 percent tariff on US goods based on our GST rate?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: I can assure the member that our diplomats are in fact engaging with the US administration to make clear our position that that is not our effective tariff rate. I would also say that we are humble enough to know that there are some global events that we can't control. Our focus is on that which we can control. The member can also be assured that we will continue to fight for our exporters—both in terms of their access to the US market but also through increasing their access to other markets by continuing to pursue trade agreements throughout the world, building on the work of successive Governments.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Does she stand by her assurance, in February of this year, that New Zealand will not be directly affected by tariffs; if so, how can the New Zealand public trust her judgment today?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Mr Speaker, as is sometimes the case with that member, I would have to check that paraphrasing of my comment in the context in which it was made to assure that she is actually accurately representing my statements.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Does she regret cancelling and delaying housing, hospital, and school builds, which has caused the collapse of the construction sector and the deepest recession seen in 30 years?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: To make a few facts clear, the New Zealand Government delivered more classrooms in the past year than were delivered by the previous Government in the year prior to that. We have continued to commit significant funds to health infrastructure, and Kainga Ora have continued to add to the stock of social housing, continuing a build programme which is adding to the number of social housing places in New Zealand.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: As a matter of education, if the economy is going at 0.7 or annualised at 2.8, how could you possibly describe that as being a recession?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: The Deputy Prime Minister makes a good point, which is that on our watch we have seen inflation return to the target band, interest rate reductions occur, and we have seen in the last three months of last year a return to growth above that which was forecast by consensus economists.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Is the Government going to use US tariffs and worsening global economic conditions as an excuse to hide their economic mismanagement, given there will be deeper cuts to the public services that Kiwis rely on, record migration out of New Zealand, and a collapsing construction industry?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: No. We don't do excuses. We take responsibility for the actions we can control.

Hon David Seymour: Would the Minister of Finance characterise the significant and dramatic and sudden changes in US tariffs as an "excuse" or the biggest thing to hit the world economy in a long time that is creating turmoil in every market in the world?

Hon NICOLA WILLIS: Minister Seymour makes a very good point. For members opposite to characterise our response to what is a global economic event as an excuse, I think entirely underestimates the gravity of the series of world events that are currently unfolding. And while members opposite may wish to be ignorant of that and pretend that New Zealand is somehow immune from global events, that is not a course of action we will be taking.

Question No. 5—RMA Reform

5. CATHERINE WEDD (National—Tukituki) to the Minister responsible for RMA Reform: What announcements has he made about granny flats?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP (Minister responsible for RMA Reform): Over the weekend, Chris Penk, Shane Jones, and I announced Government will be making it easier to build granny flats. In fact, we'll be going further than previously announced. We consulted on 60 square metres without building or resource consent; we've decided to increase that to 70 square metres. We'll be amending the Building Act and resource consenting system to make it easier to build granny flats, or, as they're known in the legal parlance, minor residential units.

Catherine Wedd: Did submitters on the Government's consultation on granny flat changes ask for the size increase?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Yes, indeed. There was public consultation in June and August last year. Many submitters said the 60 square metre limit should be increased—some people said 65; some people said no limit at all. We've gone for the pragmatic option of 70 square metres. Homeowners were supportive of the granny flat policy. Many submitted that it would make it easier to facilitate intergenerational living and, of course, help ease our housing crisis.

Catherine Wedd: Why is building granny flats a potential game-changer for the housing market?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: People who want to build simple stand-alone dwellings on their properties need a building consent under the Building Act, and, in many cases, a resource consent as well. Changing that is a Government priority suggested through the New Zealand First - National coalition agreement, and we are very pleased and proud to acknowledge it. Making it faster and more affordable will give us more housing options, particularly for grandparents, people with disabilities, young adults, and workers in the rural sector. Increased housing availability directly translates to lower living costs for our communities.

Catherine Wedd: How does the Government plan to implement these changes?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: There will be an amendment to the Building Act in the middle of this year which will exempt granny flats from needing a building consent if it meets the building code and has a simple design, if it's carried out by authorised building professionals, and if people notify their local council before the building is completed. We've carefully considered the feedback and we think this criteria strikes the right balance between enabling housing growth and managing risks. We'll also be developing a new national environmental standard under the Resource Management Act to make sure no resource consent is required.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: In the interests of the nation's understanding, could you please describe who's the informational genius behind this brilliant policy?

Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Success has many fathers, but in relation to this case, the Hon Shane Jones has been the driving force behind this excellent policy, because he's seen the impact of small units in the Far North and what an impact it can have on families, and it's been a real game-changer there. And we look forward to cutting that red tape and seeing more of them around the country.

Question No. 6—Health

6. Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Labour) to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by his statement that "Timely and quality access to healthcare for the people of Tairāwhiti is a priority for our government"; if so, why has the vacancy rate for Gisborne Hospital's Senior Medical Officers increased from 35 percent to 44 percent under this Government?

Hon SIMEON BROWN (Minister of Health): In the context it was made, yes. I acknowledge that too many New Zealanders, including those in Tairāwhiti, are waiting too long to receive care. However, I also acknowledge the great work of our health workforce in Tairāwhiti who have achieved a 92.8 percent result against our shorter stays in emergency department health target for quarter two 2024-25, which exceeds the milestone and is well above the national average. Our priority remains delivering access to timely, quality healthcare for all New Zealanders, including the people of Tairāwhiti. I'm advised the current senior medical officer (SMO) vacancy rate is 38.55 percent in Tairāwhiti. I'm further advised there has been an increase in full-time equivalent senior medical officers from 49.1 in December 2023 to 55 at the end of March this year, in Tairāwhiti, after a steep decline from 57.2 in December 2022 to 49.1 in December 2023.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: What specific action is being taken to address reports from senior doctors that people are losing their vision for want of seeing an ophthalmologist at Gisborne Hospital?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Health New Zealand is actively recruiting for senior medical officers in Tairāwhiti. An active national and international recruitment plan is under way with all recruitment requests approved. In the pipeline, Health New Zealand has 11.1 full-time equivalent senior medical officers who have accepted offers and are preparing to start work in Tairāwhiti. A further two full-time equivalent roles have been offered, three full-time equivalents are at the interview stage, and recruitment is actively under way for 21.3 further full-time equivalent roles.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Does he admit that the Government's response to the clinician's August letter that reported daily delays and impediments to care that were direct results from vacancies and the ability to recruit new staff was inadequate, and that the vacancies have still got worse?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, if the member had listened to my primary answer, she would have noted that the vacancy rate increased substantially in 2023. Since we have come to office, the number of senior medical officers has increased. We have an active recruitment campaign under way. All vacancies are currently going through a recruitment process. As I said, there are 11 SMO full-time equivalents who have been recruited and are about to start work. Two have been offered roles, three are in the interview stage, and recruitment is actively under way for 21.3 full-time equivalent positions. We are taking action to ensure we have the front-line staff in place in Tairāwhiti to ensure they can get the care that they need after a significant drop under the previous Government.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Does he agree with Dr Shaun Grant, who heads Gisborne Hospital's children's ward, who said, "I am doing more administrative tasks now" and that, "because of a reduction in administrative support people", and, if so, is it a good use of resources for a senior clinician to fill out paperwork rather than treat sick children?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, as I said, we are actively recruiting for a range of senior medical officer roles at Tairāwhiti. We acknowledge the need for the hiring. We're investing the money. The vacancies have been approved for recruitment. There's 11 which have already been appointed and are about to start. We have an active plan in place following the significant decline of senior medical officers in 2023 when she was the Minister.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Will he commit to monthly public reporting of hospital vacancies and action taken by management to ensure that this issue gets the priority that it deserves and that the progress he indicates is under way actually happens?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: Well, as the Member knows, there is already regular reporting of health workforce data, and what I would say is there was a significant reduction when she was the Minister—

SPEAKER: No, that's enough.

Hon SIMEON BROWN: —of senior medical officers in Tairāwhiti and we're fixing it.

SPEAKER: Don't go there.

Question No. 7—Health

7. TODD STEPHENSON (ACT) to the Associate Minister of Health: What actions has the Government taken to increase New Zealanders' access to medicine?

Hon DAVID SEYMOUR (Associate Minister of Health): Many—most notably, filling in a significant fiscal cliff in Pharmac funding last year and then boosting Pharmac funding by around $600 million. However, we're also taking actions on consenting of new medicines by introducing a policy known as the Rule of Two. This is a policy that all three coalition parties campaigned on in the wake of COVID, and, in essence, it means that if two other recognised countries have certified a particular medication, the expectation is it will become legal in New Zealand within 30 days.

Todd Stephenson: Why is the Government progressing the "Rule of Two" pathway to speed up the approval of medicines already recognised overseas?

Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: There's always been an absurdity in New Zealanders waiting long periods of time—in the case of one recent asthma medication, 16 months for Medsafe to tell the New Zealand people it is safe for them to use a medication that is already widely used and legal in countries such as Australia, the UK, United States, Switzerland, Japan, Canada, and Singapore—all countries that have a very strong track record around their health systems and their management of pharmaceuticals. I'm not aware of any time in New Zealand history where New Zealand has had Medsafe reject a medication able to be used in one of those countries and they realised they'd made a mistake. We are simply duplicating work by insisting that we overdo our consenting of new medicines when they've already been consented in multiple other countries.

Todd Stephenson: How will the bill improve New Zealanders' health outcomes?

Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: Well, it's absolutely critical that medications that are consented in other countries are available to New Zealanders. We aspire to have First World living standards and First World healthcare. If I look at a medicine such as Ozempic, which has huge potential, it remains unconsented for some uses, and I believe it could be of great benefit to a lot of people. The question is: why should New Zealanders wait, perhaps indefinitely? The manufacturers of pharmaceuticals see New Zealand's consenting regime and its small market size, and they wonder why on earth we are duplicating processes that they've been through elsewhere.

Todd Stephenson: Are there other countries that have a verification pathway like the one proposed?

Hon DAVID SEYMOUR: Well, yes, indeed. I prefer New Zealand to be leading the world wherever possible, but in this case, we're very much trailing countries such as the United Kingdom. Countries such as Singapore also routinely take advantage of other countries' consenting of new medications with policies that you might compare to our Rule of Two. We're not blazing a trail, but we're certainly ensuring that New Zealand policy keeps up with best practice worldwide. The United Kingdom and France, for instance, is one of the fastest consenters of new medicines in the world.

Question No. 8—Defence

8. TIM VAN DE MOLEN (National—Waikato) to the Acting Minister of Defence: What steps has she taken to boost the capability of the New Zealand Defence Force?

Hon CHRIS PENK (Acting Minister of Defence): Yesterday, the Prime Minister and I released the Defence Capability Plan 2025. This is the Government's multibillion-dollar plan for a modern, combat-capable New Zealand Defence Force that pulls its weight both internationally and domestically. I want to acknowledge all the Government parties for their work in this space, as well as those on the Opposition benches who have expressed support thus far. The 15-year plan focuses on critical investments within the next four years. We regard it as a starting point—that is to say a floor, not a ceiling—and we note that it will be reviewed every two years.

Tim van de Molen: How much is being invested into the New Zealand Defence Force?

Hon CHRIS PENK: The Defence Capability Plan outlines planned commitments of $12 billion over the next four years, including a $9 billion increase to baseline funding. The plan will raise New Zealand's defence spending from the current level of approximately 1 percent of GDP to 2 percent of GDP within eight years. Over the next four years, significant investments include the maritime helicopter and 757 fleets being replaced, enabling our army to communicate securely and work effectively with our partners, acquiring uncrewed systems such as drones, and also upgrades to the Defence estate.

Tim van de Molen: Why is this investment so important?

Hon CHRIS PENK: New Zealand is part now of a very different and inherently more dangerous world than was previously the case. As the Prime Minister noted earlier today in question time, there can be no economic security without national security. As a global trading nation, of course we rely on a stable regional and international system underpinned by collective security, open trading relations, and governed by transparent rules and norms that reflect our values. We're a Pacific nation and as such we sit within the Indo-Pacific region. We have a vast maritime environment featuring the world's fourth largest search and rescue area and the eighth largest exclusive economic zone in the world. Recognising the risks within the region, this is a plan for the world as it is, not that which we would wish it to be.

Tim van de Molen: How will this Defence Capability Plan support the growth of the New Zealand defence industry?

Hon CHRIS PENK: An astute question. This requires a strong partnership with industry, which is why a defence industry strategy is now being developed following the release of the plan. Doing so will support the Government's economic growth agenda as well, including by promoting innovative and advanced technologies and fostering exports. New Zealand companies are already exporting some of those products to other markets and it makes sense that they be enabled and encouraged to do so to New Zealand as well. For that reason, we'll continue to partner with industry to ensure they have certainty on where we're heading and therefore that we can provide the support our defence force needs.

Mark Cameron: How will this new funding directly benefit the Kiwi men and women who serve in the New Zealand Defence Force?

Hon CHRIS PENK: Our people are committed, well-trained professionals, and this plan will provide them with the support that we know that they need to deploy safely and effectively both at home and abroad. I note in particular that investments in the Defence estate will enable the conditions and the environment in which our people need to live, work, and train. The overall message sent by this Defence Capability Plan is that our brave Kiwi women and men of the defence force know that they are supported to do the important work that they do on behalf of our country.

Question No. 9—Prime Minister

9. 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.

Hon Marama Davidson: Why is the Ministry of Social Development turning down 31 percent of emergency housing applications?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, as I've said to that member last week in a similar line of questioning, we are very, very proud of the progress that we're making on emergency housing. It has been fantastic to see 2,000 kids come out of motels and actually put into safe, dry homes, and 2,500 families, as well.

Hon Marama Davidson: Is rough sleeping increasing under his Government?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, what I can say is that there are 2,000 kids that are no longer in motels; they are in proper houses. There are 2,500 families that are now out of those motels and in proper houses. They're in the private rental market, they're in State housing, and they're in social housing with community housing providers. We're very proud of that track record. This was a blight on the previous Government, and we've fixed it.

Hon Marama Davidson: Does he know where the over 90 people who are denied emergency housing every month end up sleeping?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I know that there are 2,000 kids out of emergency housing and I know that there are 2,500 families out of emergency housing, and, importantly, we know that 80 percent of the people that have left emergency housing now have proper homes to live in. As for the other 20 percent, nothing has changed: people are able to access the accommodation supplement and housing support through our normal services.

SPEAKER: Just a bit of calm would be good—shouting across the House is not particularly useful in elucidating any answer.

Hon Marama Davidson: Can he guarantee that any person who leaves their home due to family violence will be given access to emergency housing?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: What I can say is that our Government's support has not changed, and if there are people who need housing support, they will be able to access it.

Hon Marama Davidson: Does he stand by his statement that "Nothing has changed. People who need help with accommodation can come to the Ministry of Social Development and get the support and the help they need.", and, if so, why were 507 emergency housing applications declined just in February this year?

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

Question No. 10—Social Development and Employment

10. Hon GINNY ANDERSEN (Labour) to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Does she stand by her employment action plan that states, "We will support people—across different population groups, different regions and facing different challenges—to use their skills so that people can lead happier, healthier and more productive lives"; if so, why?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Social Development and Employment): Yes, absolutely. That's why our Government is relentlessly focused on growing the economy and supporting more New Zealanders into jobs. Our economy is stronger when more people are working. As we unleash economic growth, it is important that as many Kiwis as possible share in the benefits. The employment action plan articulates a number of work programmes by different Ministers, to ensure we are working together to provide greater opportunities for more New Zealanders.

Hon Ginny Andersen: How does the loss of 230 jobs at Kinleith Mill in the Waikato, and a further loss of another 230 jobs at Winstone Pulp in Ruapehu contribute to her Employment Action Plan goal to "Grow regional economies by improving resilience and increasing productivity."?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: I'm very aware that for those people who have lost their jobs or are in the process, given the changes in Kinleith, it's incredibly challenging, which is why I'm proud of the Ministry of Social Development's Early Response Team, who are already working on the ground, very directly, with those who are impacted or potentially impacted.

Hon Ginny Andersen: How does the loss of hundreds of regional jobs supplying locally sourced healthy school lunches—such as Gisborne's Black Fig Catering & Events, which has gone from producing 1,200 meals daily to zero—contribute to the Employment Action Plan's goal to "Grow regional economies by improving resilience and increasing productivity."?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: I'm proud of the Employment Action Plan, where we have multiple Ministers working across to ensure that we are getting traction and supporting more Kiwis into work. If that member has a question more specifically about an initiative, she needs to direct it to the Minister responsible.

Hon Ginny Andersen: What support did her Employment Action Plan offer the business owner of Loaded Nutrition in Northland, that was forced to close after losing their school lunch contract, who stated, "All of our employees had been on benefits, including someone who would likely never have been employed as she had no work experience, but we gave her a chance and she was amazing. She absolutely loved it."?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: I'd invite that member to put the relevant question to the relevant Minister.

Hon Ginny Andersen: Why has she promised, in her Employment Action Plan, that it will enable Kiwis to "share in New Zealand's prosperity.", when her Government has increased unemployment; given tax cuts to landlords; and cut regional jobs, in favour of corporates such as Compass?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: I absolutely refute the comments that that member makes. I think her view of history is a little tainted, so let me just take the House back a step. The unemployment numbers of 5.1 percent are exactly what was forecast by Treasury under the previous Government. Unfortunately, we are dealing with the realities of high Government spending, inflation, high interest rates that lead to a recession; it leads to higher unemployment. None of us in the House want to be in that position. But our Employment Action Plan means that, across the House, across the three parties in the coalition, we are taking constructive, deliberate action to support more Kiwis into work. Our Going for Growth action plan is very much focused on how we ensure that we have more jobs and higher incomes and more money in Kiwis' pockets.

Question No. 11—Police

11 GRANT McCALLUM (National—Northland) to the Minister of Police: What feedback has he seen on the Community Beat Teams?

Hon MARK MITCHELL (Minister of Police): Last week, the Prime Minister and I joined our outstanding Wellington Community Beat Team. We got to see the positive interaction between our front-line police officers and the public. They know their patch and they build strong, trusted relationships with the entire community they serve, whether it be rough sleepers, our retail workers, or those coming into the inner city for work or pleasure. I'm proud of the work they do, and the result of a recent Stuff online poll shows that most Kiwis are as well.

Grant McCallum: Has he been out on the beat with the Wellington team before?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Yes, I have. I was with them last year. We visited several businesses and I got to hear the positive feedback from shop owners and their staff, and in one store, as a result of the work police had done with the staff, they were able to reopen a second entrance that had been closed due to theft and safety concerns.

Grant McCallum: What has the Wellington Community Beat Team achieved?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: They've made a massive contribution towards making Wellington safer. Last year, alongside a 54 percent increase in foot patrols, aggravated robberies in the Wellington district dropped by 33.6 percent. Being visible is a critical part of successful policing.

Hon Chris Bishop: Has the Minister received any positive feedback about the Wellington Beat Team from the member of Parliament for Wellington Central?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Unfortunately, no.

SPEAKER: OK. That's enough. Sit down.

Hon Paul Goldsmith: Supplementary?

SPEAKER: Well, it better not be in the same vein.

Hon Paul Goldsmith: Is it the Government's policy to "defund da Police", and if not, why not?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Mr Speaker—

SPEAKER: No, hang on. Sorry, what was that question? I didn't—[Interruption] Mr McCullum, would you like to leave the House or not? Don't make a noise while a question's being asked.

Hon Paul Goldsmith: Is it the Government's policy to "defund da Police", and if not, why not?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: No, it's not this Government's policy to defund the Police.

SPEAKER: Thank you.

Hon MARK MITCHELL: Our Government's policy is to invest in the Police. Our Government's policy was to make sure the Police had the powers they needed and a Government behind them to go out there and start to deal with the massive increase in violent crime that this country has experienced. And they're doing an outstanding job in doing that.

Grant McCallum: What message does he have for our Community Beat Teams?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: I want to acknowledge and thank all our Community Beat Teams for their dedication, hard work, and the passion they bring to keeping our communities safe.

Question No. 12—Media and Communications

12. REUBEN DAVIDSON (Labour—Christchurch East) to the Minister for Media and Communications: Does he stand by his statement that the Government is taking "immediate action to support New Zealand's media and content production sectors", and, if so, how many people in the news sector have lost their jobs in the 281 days since he made that statement?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister for Media and Communications): Yes, which is why I moved swiftly to introduce the Broadcasting (Repeal of Advertising Restrictions) Amendment Bill to repeal restrictions on Sunday advertising; why the Government made changes to eligibility criteria for the screen production rebate, which saw shows such as Shortland Street benefit as a result; and why the Government's currently consulting on proposals for a media reform package to progress changes to modernise regulation and content funding arrangements. In response to the second part of the question, based on news reports I'm aware of, approximately 71 jobs have been lost at New Zealand Media and Entertainment (NZME), 48 at TVNZ, four from The Spinoff, and 27 from Whakaata Māori. All of those people have our sympathy. Everyone's aware that the media landscape is very challenging, given the combination of changing audience habits and a tough economic environment. The Government's focus on growth is the best response to that latter change.

Reuben Davidson: What, then, is his message to the nearly 100 NZME journalists who have lost their jobs since he became the Minister, and what immediate action did he take to prevent the loss of those jobs?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Well, ultimately, decisions about private companies' hiring of, and the amount of workers that they have in their businesses, are for those private companies. What the Government can do, of course, is deal with inconsistencies across the regulation and legislation, which is why we're making changes to the various pieces of legislation that I've discussed before and why we're consulting over those changes—which I would point out the previous Government didn't get around to. But, more importantly, of course, many of those companies rely on advertising revenue and that's why a strong, growing economy is the best response.

Reuben Davidson: What is his message to the 50 journalists and staff at TVNZ who lost their jobs on 7 November last year, and what immediate action did he take to keep those people employed?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Well, my message to those people is I wish them all the very best in their next opportunities and that TVNZ is a company that is doing well to adjust to a rapidly changing situation. I don't think any person in this House would be confused when they look and see the dramatic changes in the way that people get their information and they get their news; and that companies such as TVNZ, and all media companies, have to adjust, which is what precisely they're doing.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Could I ask the Minister if the Government had the millions that were spent on the failed merger available, could they have kept some of those journalists still in employment?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Well—

Hon Willie Jackson: Point of order, Mr Speaker.

SPEAKER: Yes, when I call you.

Hon Willie Jackson: Well, the question's the wrong question—

SPEAKER: Excuse me. Hey. Look, hang on; wait on. I haven't heard you. I haven't called you. Wait until there's a bit of silence. Point of order, the Hon Willie Jackson.

Hon Willie Jackson: Thanks very much, Mr Speaker.

SPEAKER: Good.

Hon Willie Jackson: The question is the wrong question. There was no merger. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: Listen. No, no. We're not going to get into points of order over—

Hon Willie Jackson: There's no merger, Winston. Sit down.

SPEAKER: Sorry, Mr Jackson, quieten down or leave. The question's been asked. Is there an answer?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Yes. Well, it would be, obviously, a huge help to the country to have $20 million available that had not been wasted in a failed effort from the previous Government.

Reuben Davidson: Who is taking more immediate action in the local media sector: the Hon Paul Goldsmith or foreign billionaire Jim Grenon?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: I think the member needs to bone up on his questions. Ultimately, an independent person engaging in changes in an independent company is up to them, and that's something that I've got every confidence that NZME's shareholders will be able to cope with. But what we're focused on is doing what we can to create an environment where the media can continue to succeed. Part of that is having a strong, growing economy where advertising revenues pick up, and the other part is dealing with some of those imbalances that have been around for a very long time and the previous Government didn't get around to.

Reuben Davidson: Does he agree with Myles Thomas that "Melissa Lee said she could not do anything. Paul Goldsmith is saying he won't do anything for a little while longer.", and, if so, how long does he expect it to be before he gets fired for inaction and incompetence just like she did?

SPEAKER: No, the Minister doesn't need to respond to that question.

I declare the House in committee for consideration of the Appropriation (2023/24 Confirmation and Validation) Bill.

© Scoop Media