• ORAL QUESTIONS

QUESTIONS TO MINISTERS

Economy—Diversification and Resilience

1. CHRIS BISHOP (National) to the Minister of Finance: What impact is trade diversification having on the resilience of the economy?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Finance): New Zealand's increasing trade diversification has been highlighted through the recent increase in overall exports, from $67.5 billion 2 years ago to over $70 billion now, despite a $3.5 billion fall in dairy exports over that period. Since 2007, since the figures for both goods and services exports have been available, there has been good growth in exports across a diverse range of sectors. Although dairy exports have increased 49 percent since that time, 10 years ago, international education has increased by 70 percent, commercial services by 54 percent, and tourism by 32 percent. Exports of both fruit and wine have more than doubled. This increasing diversity adds to the resilience of the New Zealand economy.

Chris Bishop: How has the destination of New Zealand's export trade changed over time?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: A key part of the economy's resilience is the increased diversification of New Zealand's trade destinations. Back 50 years ago, less than 30 percent of our goods exports went into Asia; whereas, in the last 2 years, this has increased to nearly 60 percent, with a significant shift occurring over the last decade. The most obvious example of this shift is the expansion in our trade with China, which has moved from being our fifth- to our second-largest export destination over the last decade. But other countries have also grown significantly in importance as well, such as India, from 17th to seventh; Hong Kong, from 15th to 10th; and the United Arab Emirates, which has moved from 21st to 16th.

Chris Bishop: What has been the impact of growing trade with China?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: As I noted in my previous answer, China has moved from being our fifth- to our second-largest export destination since 2007. Exports of goods and services to China have more than quintupled over this time, from $3 billion to $12.3 billion. Although this has been driven significantly by primary sector exports, there has been a strong growth in services trade, and as shown by the increasing interest in New Zealand from Chinese tourists, this growth should continue. It is very valuable, particularly in regional New Zealand. The Government has worked hard to foster a strong relationship with China, and the visit of Premier Li Keqiang next week is an opportunity to further strengthen that relationship.

Ron Mark: How on earth can he have such a rose-tinted view of our economy when manufacturing is in the doldrums, we are importing unskilled migrants as workers, and merchandise trade exports have fallen by a massive $725 million in the past year alone?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I think the member has obviously got out of the wrong side of bed today. The New Zealand economy, Mr Mark, is one of the fastest growing in the OECD right now, which is a tribute to New Zealand exporters, particularly in regional New Zealand and places like the Bay of Plenty, with the kiwi fruit, and like Hawke's Bay, with its apple industry and the wine industry, and the growth in the meat industry—further opportunities there. A big part of it is the relationship with China, which this Government is proud of fostering, and that has seen very big increases in exports from the regions and incomes to the regions.

Chris Bishop: What risks may impact on New Zealand's ongoing trade success?

Hon Simon Bridges: The Opposition.

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Well, apart from Mr Mark, for most of the post - World War II period, global trade has risen roughly twice as fast as global growth as a whole and has actually driven global growth. This has slowed a lot since the global financial crisis, and recent OECD data suggests that trade growth is now slower than global growth. In this context, New Zealand exporters have done particularly well, and although the value of our exports is growing, it remains a tough operating environment for exporters. Trade disruption and protectionism propose further risks to our success, and that is why this Government will stay at the absolute forefront in advocating for free and fair trade.

• Prime Minister—Confidence in Government Decisions
•
2. METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) to the Prime Minister: Tu ai a ia i runga i te mana o ngā whakataunga katoa o tāna Kāwanatanga?

[Does he stand by all of his Government's decisions?]

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH (Prime Minister): Yes.

Metiria Turei: Does he stand by his Government's refusal to commit to an inquiry into the allegations contained in the Hit and Run book, including the allegation of the killing of children in Afghanistan by New Zealand forces; if so, why?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: At this stage, we have not seen sufficient evidence that has been substantiated from a book published less than 24 hours ago in circumstances that you would have to describe as, at least partially, politically motivated, to warrant an inquiry. However, I have sought briefings from officials and will seek more such briefings.

Metiria Turei: Even if the Prime Minister does think that this book is politically motivated, does he not agree that the allegations are serious enough to warrant a full investigation to maintain the reputation and integrity of the New Zealand Defence Force?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: I think that although the allegations are certainly of a serious nature, that simply means that the requirement for substantiation is all the greater, and I note that even the authors are somewhat conditional about the way in which they make a whole range of allegations.

Metiria Turei: Is the Prime Minister concerned about the potential that the conduct of the New Zealand Defence Force in Afghanistan could be investigated by the International Criminal Court?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: No, and I must say that we are proud of our defence forces and their service overseas, which includes the loss of 10 lives in Afghanistan. In the interests of New Zealand playing its part in securing international order, there is no suggestion in the book—there is certainly no suggestion in the briefings that I have seen or the inquiries that have already been covered—that New Zealand defence personnel have done anything other than observe the rules of engagement in a professional manner.

Metiria Turei: Is the Prime Minister not taking seriously the possibility that the International Criminal Court could investigate the New Zealand Defence Force for the alleged killing of civilians, including children, in Afghanistan and a possible Government cover-up?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: Who knows whether that is technically possible or not. Our concern in the first instance is to ensure that New Zealand defence personnel have acted and behaved to the standards that we would expect of them. I can only repeat that the book very recently published does not yet appear to have substantiated enough or any of the allegations to warrant an inquiry. However, we will continue to get briefings.

Metiria Turei: Does the Prime Minister not agree that the allegations in the book of the killing of civilians, including children, by the New Zealand Defence Force, the Special Air Service, must be taken seriously enough to warrant an inquiry into those allegations, if only to disprove them?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: Well, we are simply not going to be rushed into such a serious undertaking. I think the member should just review the standards that she is applying. We would certainly not conduct an inquiry simply on the basis of disproving unsubstantiated allegations.

• Hit and Run—Government Response to Allegations
•
3. ANDREW LITTLE (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime Minister: Will he commission an independent inquiry into the allegations made in the book Hit and Run?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH (Prime Minister): Not at this stage. The book came out less than 24 hours ago, and as I have said, the Government will not be rushed into an independent inquiry. I have had an initial briefing from the New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) about the incident and the inquiries that have already taken place. I have also been briefed on some aspects of the allegations. On the face of it, the allegations are difficult to substantiate. I will discuss these matters further with the Minister of Defence and Chief of Defence Force when they return from Iraq, where New Zealand has a significant number of serving Defence Force personnel. In the interim, I have asked for some written advice from the NZDF.

Andrew Little: Given the high regard with which New Zealanders hold their Defence Force, and from the advice he has received, can he be sure that no civilians were killed or injured in the NZ SAS raids in Khak Khuday Dad and Naik in August 2010?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: I have asked that question. The New Zealand Defence Force stands by the release that it put out last night—that is, that on the basis of independent investigation by the Afghan Government and the coalition forces back in 2011, they believe that New Zealand Defence Force personnel conducted themselves according to the rules of engagement and that civilian casualties have not been substantiated.

Ron Mark: Are we seriously suggesting that Lieutenant General Rt Hon Sir Jerry Mateparae GNZM, QSO, and Knight of the Order of St John would have approved of the killing of innocent civilians by soldiers under his command and would have been complicit in a cover-up?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: Certainly the Government is not suggesting that. The authors of the book seem to be implying it, but it would be fair to say they have not been able to substantiate that kind of allegation.

Andrew Little: Based on the advice he has received, does he know whether New Zealand personnel made any requests during the raids for fire support from the US Apache helicopters that are alleged to have killed and injured civilians on that day?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: Again, we will be asking for more written advice following on from the briefing today, but I think there has been a series of press releases, actually, that have outlined the fact that American helicopters were involved in the operation.

Andrew Little: Based on the advice he has received, does he know whether New Zealand personnel shot the two people found dead, allegedly from gunshot wounds, near the SAS position?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: Again, I would not want to comment in detail on that matter. However, I have been reassured that, in participating in the action, New Zealand Defence Force personnel did follow the rules of engagement in the way that would be expected, and I think both the Parliament and the general public need to understand there is close legal scrutiny of the planning of these operations and in review of them.

Andrew Little: Based on the advice he has received, does he know whether New Zealand SAS personnel returned to the two villages to destroy the same houses they targeted in the initial raid; if so, does he know the objective behind that decision?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: I have not received any advice on that matter.

Andrew Little: Based on the advice he has received, does he know whether New Zealand SAS personnel were aware that Qari Meraj was likely to be tortured when he was handed over to the Afghan National Directorate of Security; if so, why did they hand him over?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: Again, I have not had any advice on that particular matter. The SAS is deployed subject to very well defined terms of engagement. We expect them at all times to stick to those terms of engagement, even when they are in very stressful situations. The advice I have had so far indicates that is exactly what they have done.

Andrew Little: In light of his answers on these important questions and the risk these allegations pose to the reputation of New Zealand's Defence Force, is it not right to commission an independent inquiry to reassure the public about our soldiers' conduct?

Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: As I have said, we are not going to be rushed into such an inquiry on the basis of a book launched yesterday in a manner that you would have to describe, at least, as partially politically motivated. As I said to the co-leader of the Greens, rebutting allegations that may or may not be substantiated—and, in this case, have not been substantiated—is not a good reason to embark on such a serious type of inquiry.

• Police—Applicant Numbers
•
4. KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National) to the Minister of Police: What update can she give about the number of people who want to join the Police?

Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister of Police): Earlier this year the Prime Minister announced funding for an extra 1,125 Police staff, including 880 sworn officers. As a result, we will need more than a thousand new recruits. I am happy to report that the number of people applying to join the Police has hit a new high in 2017, following a successful summer recruitment campaign. In January and February 1,351 people applied to join the Police, twice the number of applications as in the same period in 2016.

Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi: What reports has she seen about the number of women who want to join the police?

Hon PAULA BENNETT: As the Minister of Police, but also as the Minister for Women, it is great to see that there has been a 61 percent increase in the number of women who were interested in becoming cops in January and February this year, compared with the same time last year, and as the commissioner's goal is to get 50 percent of the police sworn policewomen, I think that is a great start.

Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi: When will the first of the 880 new police be out on the beat?

Hon PAULA BENNETT: The Police College is currently preparing to train an average of 220 additional police per year over the next 4 years. They will double the size of most recruit wings—

Chris Hipkins: For some time next decade.

Hon PAULA BENNETT: —from 40 to 80 recruits. The first recruits will be training in July this year, you will be pleased to know, Mr Hipkins, and be out patrolling by November. We have made a commitment that once all the new police are in place, 95 percent of New Zealanders will be within 25 kilometres of a patrolling police officer 24 hours a day.

Ron Mark: Will the Minister tell the House why people are joining the Police at a time when you are cutting commercial vehicle investigation unit staff by 26, highway patrol staff by 90; and how would it affect your recruiting if the media gag that has been placed on the 200-odd staff who, we have been told, are going to be laid off by July was lifted?

Hon PAULA BENNETT: Well, it is the commissioner who moves police around from road policing and into general, and that is what they are doing. There are changes that are happening, and you can see that with the technology that there is now in road policing, in particular, as that increases there will be some changes there. But what I can assure that member is that there will be more police on the beat by the end of this year.

• Freshwater Management—Commentary
•
JAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green): Before I begin I would like to wish the Minister a very happy World Water Day.

5. JAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green) to the Minister for the Environment: Does he agree with the OECD that there are "significant management issues in relation to the availability, demand, and distribution of freshwater resources" in parts of New Zealand?

Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment): The same best wishes to the member. Yes, and that is why our Government has introduced national metering requirements; the first in New Zealand national policy statement on fresh water; requirements on councils to set minimum flows in our rivers and limit nitrates, phosphorus, ammonia, and algae; and it is also why this Government has increased by six-fold the funding for clean-ups, now over $450 million. Our latest steps are to require regional councils to improve the swimmability of New Zealand waterways by 1,000 kilometres each year to achieve 90 percent of lakes and rivers by 2040.

James Shaw: Why is he delaying a decision until after the election on pricing the commercial use of water, when the OECD said yesterday that water limits have already been surpassed in some regions of New Zealand?

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Because the pricing of water is a complex issue. For instance, the level that is proposed of 10c a litre would impose a cost of $600 billion on the agriculture industry, which would wipe it out. That is why we say this needs to be done in a considered way, and that is why we have referred it to the technical advisory group.

James Shaw: Does he agree with the simple principle that if a business profits from the extraction of water it should pay for that water?

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I remind the member that New Zealand extracts only 2 percent of its total water resource, and so any pricing regime actually needs to be developed quite carefully, or we have the capacity to do significant economic damage to key sectors like agriculture that earn this country a great deal of its export earnings.

Scott Simpson: How does this 2017 OECD environmental review compare with the review made back in 2007 on the issue of fresh water?

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The 2007 review was very critical of New Zealand's freshwater management, saying at the time there was no national policy statement, there was no national environment standards, and that only two out of our 16 regional councils had water management plans. The latest report states that the national policy statement is a welcome step towards addressing water quality and quantity challenges and fills a longstanding gap. The report also highlights the success of the cap-and-trade project on Lake Taupō, describing it as world leading. It also notes that all but one of our regional councils now have a water plan.

James Shaw: Can he explain how 100-year-old, pristine, deep-aquifer water is any different from other resources that the Government already charges companies to extract, like oil, gas, sand, or even gravel?

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The substantive difference is that resources like coal, ironsand, and gravel are limited resources. Actually, New Zealand has 500 trillion litres of water—new water—every single year. We use only 2 percent of that. If you take an area like water consents, only a very small portion of that which is consented is actually used.

James Shaw: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I was asking about pristine, 100-year-old, deep-aquifer water, not the amount of water that falls out of the sky.

Mr SPEAKER: I know the member mentioned that in the question, but the essence of the question is: why treat water differently from oil, sand, or gravel? The Minister addressed that very definitely.

James Shaw: Is he concerned about the potential for a gold rush of consents for freshwater extraction, while he delays making a decision about the possibility of introducing a commercial water user charge?

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: No, I am not concerned with a gold rush. I note that last year the actual amount of bottled water exports dropped by 10 percent. I also note that the Green Party made a big deal at the weekend of a consent granted on the West Coast for water bottling. The consent was granted in 1991. It has not been taken up in 25 years, suggesting that this "immediate crisis" is not quite what the Green Party presents.

• Housing Affordability—Commentary
•
6. PHIL TWYFORD (Labour—Te Atatū) to the Minister for Building and Construction: Does he accept the finding of the periodical The Economist, that New Zealand has the most unaffordable housing in the developed world?

Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for Building and Construction): No, and that is not what The Economist said. Furthermore, the report is based on 6-month-old data, and Auckland house prices have dropped 8 percent since then.

Phil Twyford: Does he accept that, according to The Economist, New Zealand has had the highest rise in house prices, costs the most against the average person's income, and now has the biggest difference between house prices and rents?

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I also note that New Zealand has had the strongest economic growth, some of the lowest levels of unemployment, and some of the strongest population growth. I would also note that the OECD report actually notes that house prices in countries such as Australia, in major cities, have actually grown faster than they have in New Zealand.

Phil Twyford: Does he accept the glowing accolades of the property speculators, who made an average profit of $70,000 per house flipping Auckland houses last year and who say that he is doing a great job on the housing portfolio?

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Every time I hear the member saying that a Labour Government is going to stop speculators I have to ask the question: why and how—[Interruption]; how—because anybody who pretends that they can prevent speculation is dreaming.

Phil Twyford: When the former Prime Minister, John Key, told him to supercharge the housing market when he appointed him to fix the housing crisis in January 2013, why did he take him literally and drive up the median house price to median income ratio from 6.7 times to 10 times, and run up a 40,000 dwelling deficit?

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: When I became the building and construction Minister New Zealand was building 13,000 houses per year. New Zealand is now building 30,000 houses a year. I challenge the member to find any 4-year period where house construction has grown so quickly.

Joanne Hayes: What recommendations has The Economist made about how to improve long-term housing affordability?

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The Economist has noted that the worst house prices exist in cities with the tightest land regulation, and has strongly advocated policies that reduce the time and cost of consenting new housing developments. That is exactly what this Government is doing with its Resource Management Amendment Bill, which is being so strongly opposed by members opposite—showing that they are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Phil Twyford: Is he surprised that Hugh Pavletich, the co-author of the Demographia report on housing affordability—whose foreword to that report was contributed by the current Prime Minister only a few years ago—describes him, the Minister, as a blundering incompetent?

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I am use to all sorts of personal abuse. I just get on with doing my job and focusing on the issues that matter.

Phil Twyford: Can he answer this question, which was posed by the Dominion Post: "Nearly everyone can see the problem, from the teachers who can't afford a house in Auckland, to the employers calling for a huge public house-building programme…Why can't the Government see it?".

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: This Government has done more in the reform of the housing market than any Government in living memory. That is why I am proud of our record. Whether it has been the generous HomeStart support, the Housing Infrastructure Fund, the changes to the Resource Management Act, or the changes in the Auckland Unitary Plan—it is those sorts of substantive reforms that will make the difference.

Ron Mark: Noting that the only winners in his comprehensive housing plan are speculators and foreigners, why will he not admit that his comprehensive housing plan is nothing short of a "Nick-tastrophe"?

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I look at the 20,000 New Zealanders who picked up a KiwiSaver HomeStart grant—the most generous support that Government has provided. I look at the doubling in the amount of funds withdrawn from KiwiSaver by those who are buying houses. I look at the 30,000 houses per year that are being built—more than double than when I became Minister. I simply challenge the member: find me a period where house construction has grown so quickly. [Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! Mr Faafoi.

• Trade—Announcements
•
7. TODD MULLER (National—Bay of Plenty) to the Minister of Trade: What recent announcements has he made on New Zealand's trade interests?

Hon TODD McCLAY (Minister of Trade): A fortnight ago, with the EU Commissioner for Trade, Cecilia Malmström, I announced that New Zealand and the European Union have concluded scoping discussions towards a free-trade agreement (FTA) with the EU, and that both sides will now seek mandates to launch negotiations. New Zealand and the European Union both recognise there are substantial benefits to be gained from free trade, and we are now one step closer to a high-quality comprehensive FTA that can deliver great outcomes for our citizens. Two-way trade between the EU and New Zealand sits at around $20 billion.

Todd Muller: What announcements have been made on advancing New Zealand's trade relationship with the United Kingdom?

Hon TODD McCLAY: Two weeks ago I met with the British trade secretary, Liam Fox, in London. Secretary Fox indicated that New Zealand, along with Australia, will be the first countries to negotiate new free trade agreements with the United Kingdom as soon as it is in a position to do so. This is excellent news for New Zealand exporters to the UK, with current two-way trade sitting at around NZ$5 billion.

Todd Muller: What opportunities has the Minister identified on improving trade with Latin American countries?

Hon TODD McCLAY: Last week I was in Chile and met with the Pacific Alliance countries. The Pacific Alliance will offer associate membership of the alliance as a precursor to trade negotiations with selected countries. This is a significant development, and I expect New Zealand to be one of the first countries to start negotiations with that trading bloc. The prospects of a high-quality and comprehensive trade deal for New Zealand with the Pacific Alliance have now increased significantly.

Todd Muller: What statements has the Minister seen on the future of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)?

Hon TODD McCLAY: Last week TPP Ministers met in Chile to discuss ways forward for the agreement. We made a firm commitment to collaborate in keeping markets open to the free flow of goods and services and investment, advancing regional economic integration, and strengthening the rules-based international trading system across the Asia-Pacific. We have agreed that high-level officials will meet to consider options for next steps. It is too early to know what the outcome of these discussions might be, but the New Zealand Government will continue to fight for better access for our exporters in overseas markets.

• School Buildings—Funding and Support
•
8. CHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka) to the Associate Minister of Education: What is the total number of schools that have been identified as requiring significant property assistance that could not be met from their direct 5-year agreement funding allocation, and how many of those schools have received assistance, to date?

Hon NIKKI KAYE (Associate Minister of Education): I have defined "significant property assistance" as those undergoing major redevelopments, those in the Christchurch schools rebuild programme, and those receiving weather-tightness funding. I am advised that all of these schools add up to 926. In terms of those that have received assistance, I am advised that all have received some form of assistance. In terms of the Christchurch schools rebuild programme, of the 115 the plan is publicly available and they are in some form of either construction or being delivered or in design. In terms of the major redevelopment programmes, a number have been delivered or in design and construction. In terms of the weather-tightness programme, of the 840 I am advised the majority are being delivered. There is a group for which we are undertaking further inspections and working with the school to determine the appropriate remedial works.

Chris Hipkins: How much was the fiscal gap between forecast school infrastructure spend over the next 10 years and the needs identified as calculated by officials back in 2014, and why 3 years later does she continue to refuse to release that information?

Hon NIKKI KAYE: I am not sure what report the member is referring to, but what I can say to the member is that we have now done condition assessments of every school in New Zealand, which we did not have under the last Labour Government. What I can say to the member is that that has told us the scale of the issue and we have undertaken a range of programmes that we have funded to deal with those issues. We have spent over $400 million on weather tightness. We have now spent over half a billion on major redevelopments. We have spent hundreds of millions on growth. The other way that I would answer the question is that I am confident that with all of the programmes and funding that we have put in place, we will be able to address the legacy issues separate to the 5-yearly agreement (5YA) funding.

Chris Hipkins: Based on those condition assessments, what is the difference between the total cost of the work required and the current forecast expenditure?

Hon NIKKI KAYE: I think I have already answered that in my previous answer. What I have said is we have 5YA funding and we now have a range of pots of funding that we are confident will address those major legacy issues, from weather tightness—also earthquake strengthening—to some of the roll-growth issues that we have got on top of 5YA. So I am confident that with our forecast expenditure over a period of time and what we have spent already, we will be able to address those legacy issues.

Chris Hipkins: Based on that information, how long will it be before those 926 schools are brought up to standard?

Hon NIKKI KAYE: It varies, depending on the programme, and I would just encourage the member to get up to speed with some of our programmes. The Christchurch schools rebuild (CSR) programme is a 10-year publicly available document—that is that plan. In terms of the major redevelopments, I would have to go and check, but, as I have said, they are all funded so it just depends how long they take. Some of them—for instance, Western Springs College—will take a number of years. In terms of the leaky-building programme, I think I have already answered a parliamentary question to the member previously, in, I think—not that I am remembering my parliamentary questions for several years—2016, which said it was a 6-year programme.

Chris Hipkins: What is the latest date that she expects the 18 percent of schools that have been identified as "poor" or "very poor" in their condition to be brought up to standard?

Hon NIKKI KAYE: Again, I would have to go and check the definitions that he is using, but on the three programmes that I have mentioned, you know, the leaky-building project was 6 years as of 2016, the CSR programme was 10 years, and the major redevelopments programme I would expect would not be any longer than 6 years.

Chris Hipkins: Is she saying that within 6 years all schools that have been identified as below standard will be brought up to standard?

Hon NIKKI KAYE: Sorry, I could not actually hear his—

Mr SPEAKER: I will ask the question to be repeated.

Chris Hipkins: Is she saying that within 6 years all of those schools that have been identified as below standard will be brought up to standard?

Hon NIKKI KAYE: I have to go and check the exact dates of the programmes and I would want to check the exact dates of some of those redevelopments, because some of them have not started yet, but it is my expectation—and I will go and check—that it would be between 6 to 8 years that we would have those three programmes delivered.

• Primary Sector—Announcements
•
9. IAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei) to the Minister for Primary Industries: What recent announcements has he made on how the Government is supporting growth in the primary sector?

Hon NATHAN GUY (Minister for Primary Industries): Recently I announced two Sustainable Farming Fund projects aimed at the better use of irrigation. The first project is led by Irrigation New Zealand, and will identify the benefits of irrigation good management practices and the barriers to taking up new technology. The second project looks at the positive effects of irrigation on the water-holding capacity of soils in Canterbury. A report by the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research found that irrigation contributes $2.2 billion to the national economy, and this has the potential to increase further, of course, in a sustainable way.

Ian McKelvie: What specific announcements has he made about support to combat animal and horticultural disease?

Hon NATHAN GUY: Of course, we cannot grow our primary sector without protecting it as well. That is why I have announced $1.2 million of funding for three projects to combat animal and horticulture diseases. The first project will look at facial eczema and develop guidance on how to best monitor and manage the disease. The second project looks at helping track and control bovine viral diarrhoea, which affects around 80 percent of New Zealand's dairy and beef herds, and it is estimated to cost dairy farmers around $100 million a year. The third project aims to reduce infection in potato seed tubers, increase the yield, and reduce the use of agrichemicals.

• Social Development, Minister—Statements
•
10. DARROCH BALL (NZ First) to the Minister for Social Development: Does she stand by all her statements?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister for Social Development): Yes, in the context in which they were made.

Darroch Ball: Does she stand by her statement "… the research tells us dealing with 17-year-olds in the youth justice system offers us the best opportunity to break that cycle of reoffending and help these people grow into responsible adults."; if so, why?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: Yes.

Darroch Ball: How can she sign off on a change in the Youth Court age when, in the evidence she provided, it contradicts what she has stated—for example, "transfer of juveniles originally arrested for property crimes was associated with a decrease in reoffending compared with juveniles initially arrested for similar crimes and retained in the juvenile system", that limitations "cannot be accounted for by statistical models", and that other important factors "are not able to be accounted for in this analysis"?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: Because the evidence is very clear that by intervening early in a young offender's life, we have a much better chance of supporting them to live very successful lives, and the statistics are very clear that the interventions at that very early stage see not only a reduction in the amount of reoffending for most of those youth but also a reduction in the types of offending they are taking part in. Many youth make mistakes, but the purpose of the youth justice system is to keep them out of the criminal system, to make them aware of the effect of their actions on the victims, and also to help and support them to live much more successful lives.

Darroch Ball: Is it not a fact that the Minister has not even read the research she has signed off on, because if she had, she would have seen that it states: "It would be justifiable to conclude that diversion is no more effective than the traditional justice system.", that limitations "cannot be accounted for by statistical models", and that other important factors "are not able to be accounted for in this analysis"?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: I do not have that piece of research in front of me. What I can say is that there is much evidence available that shows the effectiveness of early intervention in young people's lives. That is a particular piece of research. There are numerous pieces of research that show it.

Darroch Ball: Instead of using contradictory and mixed evidence, at best, why does she not just listen to the Police Association, which has said today that there will not be a decrease in reoffending if the Youth Court age includes 17-year-olds and that it will, in fact, likely increase reoffending?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: I think that if you are going to quote organisations in the House, you need to quote them correctly—that is our expectation.

Darroch Ball: I just did.

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: No. My understanding is that the association is saying that that would be the effect if there were not adequate resources put into supporting those young people. And that is what this Government intends to do.

• School Buildings—Reports
•
11. MATT DOOCEY (National—Waimakariri) to the Associate Minister of Education: What recent reports has she received regarding school property?

Hon NIKKI KAYE (Associate Minister of Education): I am pleased to confirm I recently had an update on this Government's investment in school property. Over the last 8 years, there has been more than $5 billion in funding committed towards school infrastructure, which is the largest investment ever by any Government. In that time we have built over 30 new schools. In the last few years we have moved on more than 30 major redevelopments, worth close to half a billion dollars. Since 2014 we have spent around $300 million on additional classrooms to help schools manage growth. This is a Government that is building for growth, improving the quality of our schools, and ensuring all students have somewhere safe and healthy to learn.

Matt Doocey: What updates has the Minister received about progress on the Christchurch schools rebuild programme?

Hon NIKKI KAYE: In November 2013 the Government committed $1.137 billion in capital funding over 10 years to rejuvenate the education network in greater Christchurch. I can confirm that the programme is proceeding on schedule and within budget. It comprises a total of 115 schools: 13 to be built on new sites, 10 to be built on existing sites, 34 schools to be fully redeveloped, and 58 to be moderately redeveloped. To date, 10 schools are complete, 24 are in construction, 46 are in design, and 35 are in the programme. This includes the stunning new Lemonwood Grove School, opened just last Friday by the Prime Minister, me, and the hard-working local Selwyn MP, the Hon Amy Adams.

Jonathan Young: What recent announcements has the Minister made regarding school property in New Plymouth?

Hon NIKKI KAYE: On Monday I announced that $3.6 million in property projects are now under way in New Plymouth. This includes a new $2 million learning support centre for students with special education needs at Spotswood College and $1.6 million at Te Pi'ipi'inga Kakano Mai Rangiatea for four extra classrooms to meet roll growth. I would like to thank that member for attending the sod turnings on behalf of myself and for his dedicated advocacy for the educational needs in the New Plymouth area. This investment is part of a $12 million commitment since 2016 that we have made to New Plymouth to support school redevelopments and growth.

• Health Services—Support for New Mothers
•
12. Dr DAVID CLARK (Labour—Dunedin North) to the Minister of Health: Is he confident that new mothers are being supported in public hospitals?

Hon NICKY WAGNER (Associate Minister of Health) on behalf of the Minister of Health: Yes, absolutely. Our Government prioritises the health of mothers and babies, but as always in health, we are keen to continue to improve our services, to meet the expectations of every new mother.

Dr David Clark: Is he confident that the district health boards (DHBs) have enough funding to ensure that there are enough midwives rostered on in the weekends or after hours in hospitals, when new mothers like Mary-Lou Harris, who experienced complications at birth, are left unsupported overnight and feel unsafe because nurses are too overstretched on wards?

Hon NICKY WAGNER: Yes, we are. There are 1,377 midwives working in DHBs across the country, and that is a record. There are 2,980 more midwives working in our health system. The ministry is aware that there are some urban DHBs that experience difficulty recruiting sufficient midwives, but this is a distribution issue rather than an issue of short supply. The ministry has a number of initiatives to support local midwives and new graduate midwives, through voluntary bonding and locum support. We are also successfully recruiting overseas.

Dr David Clark: Does he accept responsibility for the fall, since 2013, in the number of midwives per capita employed by DHBs under his watch?

Hon NICKY WAGNER: I know that the member is new to health, but he may not have heard what I said. There are 1,377 midwives working in DHBs, and a record 2,980 working in our health system. [Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Supplementary question, Dr David Clark.

Dr David Clark: I will just recover, after that put-down. Give me a minute to compose myself, please.

Mr SPEAKER: If the member needs time to take a spell, we will be moving on.

Dr David Clark: Does he think it is acceptable that new mother Lisa Calino, who needed to go to the bathroom and had just had a caesarean, was told by a nurse that she had to move and put her son back in the cot herself, because the nurse on call said: "You'll have to do that. We are understaffed."?

Hon NICKY WAGNER: I am always very sorry to hear that circumstances are such that our healthcare has not met the expectations of all mothers. But I would like to report what the norm is. Our survey says that 85 percent of new mothers report that they are satisfied or very satisfied with their time in labour and birth, and 90 percent of new mothers said that they were confident or very confident in the skills of the care that they are getting in hospital, and 80 percent of them were satisfied or very satisfied with the overall care that they received after the birth. So I am very sorry for your patient, but that is not the norm.

Dr David Clark: What outcomes has Health Workforce New Zealand's midwifery strategic advisory group delivered in light of the chief executive of the New Zealand College of Midwives, who sits on that group's, comment that "We just meet. That's all we do. Nothing happens."?

Hon NICKY WAGNER: I am very sorry to hear that comment. They tell me that they are working very hard and delivering better health for mothers and babies, and certainly we are resourcing them to do so.

Dr David Clark: What responsibility does he take for the significant funding problem that sees the Waikato District Health Board 22 full-time midwives down and Capital and Coast District Health Board nine midwives down, and that sees DHBs like Waikato expected to make savings in nurse vacancies to manage its deficit, and is he confident that all funds allocated to DHBs for maternity services are entirely being spent on maternity services and not being used to fund other overstretched services?

Hon NICKY WAGNER: Yes. We are sure that they are using their money for maternity services, because we are prioritising the health of mothers and babies. What is more, the member—[Interruption] I know he is new to health—is absolutely wrong when he says that we have had less funding, because we have increased our funding by $4.3 billion. We have moved it from $11.8 billion to $16.1 billion, which is the most money that has ever been spent on health, and certainly we are right behind mothers and their babies.

© Scoop Media