Sitting date: 2 Apil 2025

ORAL QUESTIONS

QUESTIONS TO MINISTERS

Question No. 1—Justice

1. DANA KIRKPATRICK (National—East Coast) to the Minister of Justice: What actions is the Government taking to ensure the victims of crime are put at the heart of the justice system?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (Minister of Justice): Well, the Government is taking a range of actions to prioritise the needs of victims over those of offenders. Today, the Victims of Sexual Violence (Strengthening Legal Protections) Legislation Bill will go through the next stage in Parliament. This bill addresses two longstanding issues with current settings for sexual violence by stopping child victims of sexual violence being questioned about consent in most circumstances and by changing name suppression settings to empower victims.

Dana Kirkpatrick: What changes is the Government making to name suppression settings?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: In the case of sexual offending, the court will no longer be able to grant permanent name suppression to a convicted adult offender unless the victim agrees. This is a significant change, but if we are serious about putting victims first, we have to do things differently. With present name suppression settings, victims can't speak about their experience or warn others if permanent name suppression is granted. This changes that.

Dana Kirkpatrick: Why is the Government making these changes in the victims of Sexual Violence (Strengthening Legal Protections) Legislation Bill?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Well, in 2023, permanent name suppression was granted to 76 convicted offenders of one or more sexual offences. Many more tried to get it and expose victims to retraumatising delay. Going through the courts is a long, arduous, and retraumatising experience for victims, and we want to change that. We also recognise concerns this may place on undue—well, there's been concerns raised about the undue pressure that this may place on victims, and I want to make it clear to the House that the legislation is clear that if a victim does not want to make a decision around name suppression, then the court will.

Dana Kirkpatrick: What other actions is the Government taking to put victims at the heart of the justice system?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Well, this Government has progressed on a number of actions. We've appointed the Ministerial Advisory Group for Victims of Retail Crime, which is delivering practical recommendations. Last week, we passed the Sentencing (Reform) Amendment Act, which strengthens real consequences for crime and improves the trust that New Zealanders have in the justice system. Our target is to reduce the number of victims of serious crime by 20,000 people. We want fewer victims of crime and we're making great progress on that.

Hon Dr Duncan Webb: Was the Minister putting victims of crime first when he used statistics from a tweet to erroneously claim reductions in violent crime, rather than the official New Zealand Crime and Victims Survey statistics, which show no substantial progress?

Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Well, I think the member will find that the next iteration of the New Zealand Victims of Violent Crime Survey is showing continued great success towards our target, and in contrast to the previous Government—

SPEAKER: No, no—we don't need to do that.

Hon Paul Goldsmith: But I'd like to make that contrast, sir.

SPEAKER: Thank you—that's good. Question No. 2, the Rt Hon Chris Hipkins.

Question No. 2—Prime Minister

2. 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.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Does he stand by his statement that the quality of a person's life is driven by the quality of their health, and nothing is more important; if so, why is he allowing patients in Nelson to suffer through emergency surgeries which could have been avoided if the Government had allowed hospitals to hire the doctors and nurses that they need?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, there is no doubt about it, we have some real long-standing challenges in our healthcare system. That's why this Government is spending an extra $17 billion, it's why it's actually hiring more workforce, it's put back in place targets, and with respect to Nelson, it's been fantastic to see a rapid response from the Minister to put a clinical team in there to actually work out how they can work through the issues that they're experiencing with the massive wait-list backlog that's existing there.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Why should the people of Nelson have confidence in the answer that the Prime Minister just gave when one of the things contributing to the current crisis in healthcare in Nelson was his Government's decision to stop hospitals hiring the doctors and nurses they need?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I disagree. There are more people being hired into the healthcare system than there has ever been, there is more money being pumped into the system, and there is a massive backlog on wait-lists, and that is why this Government has reinstated targets, that's why we're putting more money in, that's why we're hiring more people. But, importantly, with respect to Nelson—where we've had longstanding backlogs on wait-lists for some time—we have a clinical team that has arrived there to work through how they can use resources in the private system; how they use resources at neighbouring Blenheim hospital; how they can actually reschedule; how they can do weekend clinics, rescheduling theatre time; and, most importantly, using private capacity too.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Has his Government's hiring freeze on doctors and nurses in hospitals made the wait-lists in Nelson shorter or longer?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: There is more money, there are more staff, and there is no hiring freeze.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Why should New Zealanders have confidence the health system is improving under is leadership when half of the GPs surveyed by New Zealand Doctor say they feel more pessimistic now than they did before he appointed Simeon Brown as the Minister of Health just a few months ago?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, the Minister is doing an exceptionally good job clearing up a botched merger of the health system that the last Government left behind, and New Zealanders can have faith that this Government will sort the mess out—as we are many other messes—because we are investing $17 billion more, we are hiring more staff, we have 2,000 more nurses in the system than we did when we came to power, they are paid well—relative to their New South Wales counterparts—attrition is low, and importantly, we've set that target so that everybody in the healthcare system is very clear about what we're asking them to deliver. Now we need to see an improved Health New Zealand organisation.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Well, was the GP wrong when he told New Zealand Doctor, in response to Christopher Luxon's Government's policies, "This is popularist and lobbyist policy over commonsense. We have felt no benefit or support from the change, nothing has been done for GPs, and we remain in a precarious position which cannot be fixed by soundbites."?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, what I'd just say to that member is the wait-lists in Nelson are unacceptable, and they have ballooned across the whole country but four months for an elective surgery—waiting more than four months—went up 2,500 percent under the last Government. Waiting more than four months for a first surgery—for a specialist appointment, went up by over 6,500 percent. So we are dealing with a challenge around wait-lists that we have inherited, and we are working our way through it very well.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: So what does he say to the general practitioner who said, "GPs are demoralised and sick of it and are being made sick by all of these political manoeuvres. Well done, Simeon. In just a few short weeks, you were able to break this previously relentlessly optimistic GP. Hope you are proud. If you find this response puzzling, Mr Brown, you'd better find out why you don't understand in a big hurry. You have an awful lot to learn."?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I'll just say, I am very proud of our new Minister of Health because he's doing a great job, and I'd just encourage the member, go check out what was announced two weeks ago as part of our primary care package to make sure that people can get access to their GP in their community. And think about the 100 doctors that we're actually expediting so they can actually practice as GPs. Think about the 400 extra places we're making available for nurses to become nurse prescribers or nurse practitioners. Think about the $285 million going into GPs with respect to making sure that they can take more people on to their rolls. And I'll just say to you, we are doing what we can, as fast as we can, to fix a botched system that we inherited from the last Government.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Why does he dismiss the concerns of general practitioners, such as the one that I just quoted, when another GP told New Zealand Doctor, "Now I hate it. I wish I never went to medical school. I wish I never became a GP. I feel on the verge of tears going to and from work most days.", under his Government?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, again, in terms of primary care where there has been no investment from the previous Government, no action from the previous Government, this Minister, in a matter of weeks and months, has put together a very comprehensive plan that we are proud about. We know there are longstanding challenges in the healthcare system. We're putting more money in, we're hiring more workers, and we're being clear on patient outcomes. We want a higher performing organisation. We want more productivity in the sector so we can deliver better outcomes for patients. And that is why we've actually added 100 placements for overseas doctors so they're not sitting there like Uber drivers as they were under that last Government's administration. That's why we've hired 400 extra graduate nurses to make sure they can do nurse prescribing and nurse practitioner work. That's why we're spending $285 million to incentivise doctors to open up their rolls and get resources into their GP practices. And that's why, from 1 July, we're offering a 24/7 digital access service to make sure that people can access their GPs in quality, timely access to healthcare. We are patient focused, unlike the last administration, which was actually just reorganising decks on the boat and not caring and delivering outcomes for New Zealanders. We're going to deliver outcomes, and you may wish to gaslight, and you may wish to do revisionist history, but we are getting the job done. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: Right, that's enough—absolutely enough.

Question No. 3—Education

3. TĀKUTA FERRIS (Te Pāti Māori—Te Tai Tonga) to the Minister of Education: How does the proposed removal of Resource Teachers of Māori funding align with the Government's commitments to te reo Māori revitalisation and improving Māori student achievement?

Hon ERICA STANFORD (Minister of Education): I want to make it very clear that the proposed removal of these roles is to reinvest this funding directly into our Government's commitments to te reo Māori revitalisation and improving Māori student achievement, and we have an extraordinarily strong track record in this area already, where we have funded literacy and numeracy resources in te reo Māori for the first time across the country, along with professional learning and development. We launched a world-first phonics check in te reo Māori. We've refreshed Te Marautanga o Aotearoa, and we're developing purpose-built tools to monitor student progression. The proposed reinvestment of the Resource Teachers (RT): Māori resource will be directed back into supporting te reo Māori and Māori achievement.

Tākuta Ferris: Can she guarantee to all the Māori communities out there of immersion schools that she is talking about Māori immersion teaching and not Māori in mainstream teaching?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: Well, to that point, it's really interesting that the RT: Māori role that we're looking at disestablishing is, in fact, extraordinarily inequitably dispersed across the country, in that many of the roles are attached to schools that are not funded for any Māori immersion learning at all, and that's the very problem we're trying to solve. We are trying to make sure that that resource is directly invested into kura kaupapa Māori, into Māori immersion learning, and into mainstream schools where there is Māori immersion happening. And that, at the moment, is not always the case.

Tākuta Ferris: If the Resource Teachers: Māori roles are disestablished in 2026, as is being proposed, what specific alternative support—specific alternative support—will be provided to ensure that Māori medium teachers receive the necessary guidance to deliver high-quality programmes to levels 1 and 2 Māori immersion students?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: The member will need to wait for the Budget, because many of those decisions will be made through the Budget, but can I say that already what we have done in this area to ensure that we are raising the achievement of Māori learners and ensuring the revitalisation of te reo Māori, is to ensure that there are tier 2 structured literacy staffing entitlements available in kura kaupapa Māori and Māori medium settings as well, along with all of the resources we are providing that are consistently available free across the country for the first time ever in literacy and in numeracy as well, along with all the professional learning and development, which goes directly to making sure that we are revitalising the language and raising Māori achievement.

Tākuta Ferris: Why has she relied on reports from 2008 and June 2012 to justify disestablishing Resource Teacher: Māori positions, while failing to acknowledge the Matarau report, which was developed in collaboration with the Ministry of Education and provided clear recommendations to strengthen the service?

Hon ERICA STANFORD: I'm actually relying on a 2014 Ministry of Education report which found quality issues, including inconsistent practices across the service, the fact that the service it was not equally distributed, and it found insufficient evidence of the impact based on current data reports, which means that we can't evidence a lift in student achievement. And, to that end, that is linked into the fact that, for example, we have five RT: Māori teachers in Southland, three in Invercargill, where there is only one kura kaupapa. Two of them are in Mosgiel, in English-medium schools with no Māori language funding. What are they doing there? We are making sure that this resource and the money that's put into this resource is directly impacting tamariki Māori in Māori immersion and kura kaupapa settings, and currently it is not.

Question No. 4—Māori Development

4. DAVID MacLEOD (National—New Plymouth) to the Minister for Māori Development: He aha ngā kaupapa kua tautoko mai koe kia whakatipu haere i ngā pakihi Māori?

[What initiatives has he supported to continue development of Māori businesses?]

Hon TAMA POTAKA (Minister for Māori Development): Hurō! Inanahi rā, e koa ana taku ngākau ki te whakarewa i te rautaki tōnui Māori hei ara tautoko i ngā mahi whakatupu i te ōhanga Māori. Ka haere ngātahi ngā ringarehe a te Kāwanatanga i te kaupapa Going for Growth.

[Hooray! Yesterday, my heart was happy to launch the Māori prosperity strategy as a support pathway for the activities growing the Māori economy. Government experts will collaboratively progress the initiative, Going for Growth.]

Our Going for Growth With Māori framework has three focus areas: increasing infrastructure investment to drive jobs and sustainable growth, accelerating Māori business exports, and further unlocking the potential of Māori land.

David MacLeod: Why focus on Māori economic growth?

Hon TAMA POTAKA: We will only become a small, advanced leading economy if the Māori economy grows, prospers, and sustains. The Māori economy is experiencing considerable growth and diversifying its assets into sectors like professional services, tourism, commercial property, and scientific research. However, it also faces challenges around infrastructure deficits, accessing finance, and unproductive land laws. This Government's accelerating of Māori economic growth will benefit Māori communities and New Zealand, whether it's in Rangitīkei, Kaikōura, or Kirikiriroa.

Hon Shane Jones: No, Kaitāia.

SPEAKER: Overdone. Carry on.

David MacLeod: How does this complement the Government's broader strategy for economic growth?

Hon TAMA POTAKA: Our focus on growing infrastructure, supporting trade and exports, and simplifying business rules aligns with the key pillars of the Going for Growth kaupapa. We will increase targeted infrastructure investment to boost jobs and to sustain growth. For example, the investment alongside the exemplary Parininihi ki Waitotara Incorporation to explore the potential of a large-scale solar farm that can serve 8,500 homes. And the recent mahi tahi led by the Prime Minister with iwi and Māori leaders at the Infrastructure Investment Summit in Tāmaki-makau-rau to attract co-investors to help fund and finance, ultimately, the country's severe infrastructure deficit.

David MacLeod: What action is being taken to help unlock economic potential of whenua Māori?

Hon TAMA POTAKA: Whenua use and development of whenua Māori plays a crucial role in iwi, hapū, whānau, landowner, trusts, and incorporations to achieve their aspirations and contribute to positive holistic outcomes across society, community, culture, and the economy. We have proposed some targeted improvements to Te Ture Whenua Maori Act to simplify planning and related processes, encourage greater development opportunities, and reduce red tape. To progress this mahi, Te Puni Kōkiri, with the Ministry of Māori Development, has released a public discussion document that invites ideas from whānau and also to generate feedback on improving Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993.

Question No. 5—Social Development and Employment

5. Hon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour—Mana) to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Malo le soifua manuia, Mr Speaker. Does she stand by the Minister of Finance's statement that "Our priority areas will continue to be hardworking everyday New Zealanders, and the frontline services like health, education and Police you rely on"; if so, what is the Government doing to support community-led services?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON (Minister for Social Development and Employment): Yes. Our Government's priority has always been everyday Kiwis and front-line services, which is why we have prioritised funding for the front line instead of unnecessary bureaucracy. The Government also supports many community-led services across a range of portfolios, including social development and employment.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Why is the Government saying that New Zealand not-for-profits make a significant contribution to the community when the Minister of Finance is actively looking to tax them on membership subscriptions that help run their services?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: In terms of my responsibility as the Minister for Social Development and Employment, many of the not-for-profit services provide wonderful services on the ground, and it is important that when Government is funding those organisations, we know that they're well run and that the public has confidence in them.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: What should local returned servicemen associations—or RSAs—do who could face higher taxes, increasing membership fees, and thereby reducing support for veterans?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: As the Minister for Social Development and Employment, I don't have responsibility for revenue and tax measures.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Point of order, Mr Speaker. This question was transferred from the Minister of Finance to the Minister for Social Development and Employment. She is not answering on behalf of, which is a slightly different issue to the one we have here. Speakers' rulings are quite clear that if the Government chooses to transfer a question, then that Minister is expected to be in a position to answer supplementaries.

SPEAKER: Up to a point. The question is transferred to the Minister for Social Development and Employment, and that is the breadth of portfolio responsibility that can be answered in this question.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. That cannot simply be the case. The Government cannot narrow the range of potential supplementary questions to a question lodged by the Opposition simply by transferring it to a Minister who doesn't have the full breadth of responsibility for the question that was asked.

SPEAKER: Well, the point is that the decision is made based on the primary question which was asked, which is: does the Minister agree with the statement made by the Minister of Finance? The answer to that was clearly given; the idea that then the Minister should know everything that the Minister of Finance knows is not reasonable.

Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Point of order, Mr Speaker. You'll find that the supplementary question that was just asked, bearing in mind that this question has been reworded—it was not lodged as written on the sheet now. It was a direct quote from the Minister of Finance being asked of the Minister of Finance, and the second part of the question is about Government support to community-led services. The question that my colleague Barbara Edmonds has just asked is directly related to a matter that the Minister of Finance is currently consulting on—or is one of the Ministers currently consulting on—that will have a direct impact on community-led services. It is absolutely in scope of the question as asked, and the Government shouldn't be able to narrow the scope of the question as asked by transferring it to a Minister who doesn't have responsibility for it.

SPEAKER: Well, the Government didn't necessarily do that. It was my decision that the question had been answered, but we'll just not get into the pedantics of an argument. Ask the question again—I'm sure it's quite easily answered.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: What should local returned servicemen associations—or RSAs—do who could face higher taxes, increasing membership fees, and thereby reducing support for veterans?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: As the Minister of Social Development and Employment, when there are discussion documents that the Government puts out, I encourage people to submit appropriately.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: What should local vegetable community co-ops that provide cheap vegetables to everyday New Zealanders do who could be taxed more and may have to close their operations?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: Our Government is very clear about the value that community organisations provide to the Government when the Government provides and purchases services from such organisations. But where there are discussion documents, even if issued by a different member or Minister in our Government, I'd encourage people to submit.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: How much revenue does the Government expect to rake in from the proposed tax on RSAs, Working Men's clubs, Lions clubs, Rotary clubs, vegetable community co-ops, credit unions, friendly societies, and other not-for-profit organisations?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: As I said in my answer to this in the first supplementary question, it is really important that the New Zealand public have confidence in the not-for-profit sector and charitable organisations, especially when those organisations are funded by central government using their tax. So it is important that we have a system where it is clear that those who should pay tax are and that those charities are robust and acting with integrity.

Hon Barbara Edmonds: Why is the Government looking at hiking taxes on 9,000 not-for-profit organisations while handling a $2.9 billion tax cut to landlords?

Hon LOUISE UPSTON: Speaking on behalf of the Minister in my area of social development and employment, I think I've been clear about why it is important that when taxpayers' money goes into service provision, we need to ensure that those who should pay tax are, and that people can have confidence in the not-for-profit sector when they are delivering services to New Zealanders. As I would say, where there are discussion documents out for consultation, they are just that. We want to consult; we want to listen to what people have to say.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Point of order. There's been a few instances recently where a question directed to a Minister is referring to a direct quote from the intended Minister. It's subsequently been transferred, which we don't dispute; that is the Government's right. But when it is specifically a direct quote from the intended Minister, it has caused some problems. Would you at least reflect on that particular type of question and whether it is appropriate to transfer instead of just getting a Minister to reply on behalf of the Minister in an instance where they might not be available?

SPEAKER: I'll do that.

Question No. 6—Prime Minister

6. 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 are Auckland Council, Downtown Community Mission, and Christchurch City Mission all reporting significant increases in rough sleeping following his Government's changes to emergency accommodation?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, as I said to the member yesterday, I'm incredibly proud of the progress that this Government has made on emergency housing. In answering the last part of her question, the reality is this is a Government that has taken 5,000 people off the State house wait-list. This is a Government that has taken 2,500 families out of squalid motel rooms, and this is a Government that has taken 2,000 kids out of motel rooms and got them in proper homes.

Hon Members: Where are they?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I'm proud of that track record, and I would hope that that member thinks that that is a great achievement and a good outcome for those individuals and those families.

SPEAKER: Before the question's asked, there may be answers that people don't like, but it doesn't mean that they can pose other questions by way of interjection; they must be rare and reasonable.

Hon Marama Davidson: Is rough sleeping on the rise under his Government?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, we don't have strong, centralised data on homelessness. But what I'd say to the member is that it's really important that—

Hon Member: That's a yes.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: 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. But what I am proud about, and I will not take lectures from the Opposition on this—

Hon Kieran McAnulty: That is not true.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: —is that we have delivered a solution in emergency housing that—

Hon Member: Not true.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: —sees 2,000 kids out of motel rooms into proper houses. What that means is they've got housing security, they can go to school, their school attendance is up—there's a whole bunch of upstream benefits of that. I would have thought the other side would have thought that was a good thing.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: None of that was true.

SPEAKER: Well, just a point here. That interjection is offensive to the House and the member knows it, so stop making it. Two members particularly have made that interjection, and if it happens again they'll be going off for an early afternoon.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Prime Minister, when tens and tens of thousands of people—Māori and non-Māori—have stayed on a marae, why would someone describe them as "rough sleeping"?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: All I can argue for is the fact that I'm proud of the fact that we are helping people who need houses and we are getting them out of emergency accommodation, which has been an abject failure policy from the Labour and Greens Government of the last administration.

Hon Marama Davidson: Why do front-line homelessness organisations say it is near impossible to get homeless people in dire need into urgent accommodation under his Government?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I disagree. Nothing has changed. If people need support for accommodation and housing, they can continue to reach out to the Government. We will continue to support and help people get off streets and into housing. But I just say to both the Labour and the Green Party, the ultimate solution here is we need to build more houses. We haven't seen support for fast track—that would free up 55,000 new houses—and we haven't seen support for the Resource Management Act reforms. So I look forward to seeing that. [Interruption]

Hon Marama Davidson: If support is available—

SPEAKER: Just wait. Quite a few people over here are a little unsettled. Obviously, a lot more supps to come.

Hon Marama Davidson: If support is available to those who need it, why has there been a 53 percent rise in rough sleeping in Auckland City over the last four months?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: As I've said in my previous answers, there will always be support available for people who need it. Nothing has changed in that regard. But I am incredibly proud of the fact that we have taken 2,000 kids out of motel accommodation and put them into proper, dry homes. I am incredibly proud that 2,500 families that were previously in motel accommodation are now in proper houses. And I'm really proud of the fact that 5,000 people who were on a State house wait-list—that went up four-fold under the last Government—are now off that list because they have housing being met.

Hon Marama Davidson: Why didn't his Government listen to officials, who warned that these changes to emergency accommodation risked more people sleeping on the streets?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: I disagree completely with the characterisation of that question, as I've explained before. There is no change. If people need accommodation support and help, that is available to them. But what is a fantastic result, that I would hope all members of this House would celebrate, is that through focus, we have been able to prioritise families with kids and get them out of motel rooms and get them into proper houses in the private rental market, in social or State housing, and that's really important.

Hon Tama Potaka: Do those with severe housing deprivation, including many who are homeless, have a number of pathways to seek support in housing, including Housing First, rapid rehousing, transitional housing, social housing, housing support products, and emergency housing for those with a genuine need in most towns in this country?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Yes. And that's why I say there will always be Government support for people who need housing and accommodation support. There is no change.

Hon Marama Davidson: If his Government doesn't have centralised data on rough sleeping, will he accept that front-line organisations reporting an increase in rough sleeping is correct?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: As I have said before, front-line organisations, people who find themselves without housing or in a homeless situation, can continue to come to Government to get the support they need. But I do want to make very clear that when you have taken 5,000 people off the State house or social housing wait-list, that is a good thing. It means those people now have houses. When you have taken 2,000 kids that were happily—

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Utterly disingenuous.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: —left in motel rooms under the last Government—

Hon Kieran McAnulty: He knows that's not the case.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: —and, actually, we've put them into proper homes and houses, and 2,500 families that were previously living in motel accommodation—

Hon Kieran McAnulty: He's standing up and he's not being up front.

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: —are now in proper housing, that is a good thing. We're proud about it because we care about New Zealanders. We care and we take action to get the problems fixed and solved. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: I'll just say to just say to a member to my left that there is a general debate coming and that sort of comment that was coming through then might be best left till then.

Hon Kieran McAnulty: Thank you. I'll do that.

Question No. 7—Building and Construction

7. DAN BIDOIS (National—Northcote) to the Minister for Building and Construction: What is the Government doing to crack down on cowboy builders, and how will this make building easier in New Zealand?

Hon CHRIS PENK (Minister for Building and Construction): We're taking decisive action to make building easier and quicker in this country. That will benefit Kiwis with homes that they can afford. At the same time, though, as reducing the compliance burden from those with a good track record in building at scale, we also need to ensure that the small minority of builders who are careless and cut corners are held to account.

Dan Bidois: What changes did the Government announce today?

Hon CHRIS PENK: Another good question. The four key areas that we've announced to rein in cowboy builders include: (1), giving more tools to the statutory boards for builders, plumbers, and electricians, allowing them to initiate investigations; (2), making information public when a builder has been suspended for disciplinary reasons; (3), introducing a waterproofing class for licensed building practitioners so that Kiwis can have confidence in those vulnerable wet areas of their homes; and (4), establishing codes of ethics for key trades so that disciplinary action can be taken in the event that tradespeople engage in deceptive practices.

Dan Bidois: What impact will these changes have for Kiwis?

Hon CHRIS PENK: It's about consumer confidence. Kiwis need to feel assured that they will have quality, safe homes. But I would also point out that the building sector itself has also welcomed the changes that we've announced. The majority of tradies in this country are reliable, honest, ethical people doing a great job, and they don't want to be tarred with the same brush as the relatively small number who are letting the side down, and we're acting accordingly.

Dan Bidois: Are there more changes planned to tackle cowboy builders?

Hon CHRIS PENK: Yes, indeed, there are. These will include increasing penalties where appropriate, but also tackling that longstanding problem of phoenixing, whereby dodgy builders and unethical people seek to avoid liability simply by creating a new legal entity. We're excited about the possibilities this will open up in terms of our granny-flats policy, for which I'll give due acknowledgement to our friends and colleagues of New Zealand First for their advocacy. Kiwis deserve to have confidence in their tradies so that we can be more trusting of those who are doing good work, and it's part of the Government's overall plan of making building easier and more affordable, growing the economy, and lowering the cost of living for Kiwis.

Question No. 8—Health

8. Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Labour) to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by his statement, "No more excuses. We measure success in one way: better outcomes for patients"; if not, why not?

Hon SIMEON BROWN (Minister of Health): In the context it was made, yes. We know that too many Kiwis are waiting too long to be seen in emergency departments, receive first specialist assessments, and have elective procedures. Our focus is on patients and delivering timely, quality healthcare for all New Zealanders. This starts with bringing back our critical health targets to drive accountability and to ensure better outcomes for all New Zealanders. This has already led to key initiatives, including Health New Zealand's elective boost, which will deliver an additional 10,579 elective procedures by June to reduce wait times.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: If there are to be no more excuses, why are Health New Zealand officials appearing on TVNZ to dismiss concerns raised by Nelson doctors that women are deteriorating while they're on wait lists and needing emergency hysterectomies rather than timely planned care?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: As the Prime Minister said earlier, Health New Zealand has a team in Nelson to address the concerns that have been raised, to ensure that patients are being put first in the Nelson region, and to get on top of the wait lists. That will include taking action such as ensuring that outsourcing is happening. I'm advised that, in the Nelson region, outsourcing has not been taking place as it has in other regions, and that is something which is being worked on. Bringing surgeons in from Blenheim to carry out more procedures in Nelson, getting teams in from other parts of the country to help get through first specialist assessment wait lists—there is a number of actions being taken to address the concerns in that community, and I look forward to further reports from Health New Zealand officials as they work through these issues.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: What excuse can he possibly have when his Government froze hiring in public hospitals, causing the number of people seeing a specialist within four months to fall from 66.3 percent to 61.2 percent within a year?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: I reject the premise of what the member is asking. If you look at Nelson Hospital, there has been an increase in clinical staff at that hospital since we came to Government. What we are focusing the system on is ensuring that we are delivering more, and I acknowledge that there is more work to do when it comes to wait lists, both for first specialist assessments and elective treatments. That's why we have done the elective boost, which is about making sure we can get more treatments done for New Zealanders faster, and I hope that the member will support such initiatives.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Is it acceptable that women with gynaecological conditions so painful they cannot go to work are being told to wait a year for treatment, and if not, will he give Nelson permission to fully staff its hospital?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: I acknowledge that there are too many Kiwis waiting too long for treatment, and if the member looked at the track record of her Government, she would realise that this is a problem which has grown over time. What we are focused on doing is ensuring that the focus goes back on the patient, that we are delivering more treatment, and I hope the member will support the elective boost, which is about making sure we get more treatments done by working across both the public and the private systems so we can get more done for Kiwis.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: If there are to be no more excuses, why is he blaming the last Government, when Dr Claudia Hays, head of the Nelson obstetrics and gynaecology department, is saying on television that they've never seen wait lists as bad as they currently are?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: The wait lists have grown over a period of time. I have been appointed as the Minister of Health to address these issues and to make sure that patients are being put first in the system, so that we can get on top of it. And that's why Health New Zealand is undertaking the elective boost, which is about maximising the number of elective treatments across both the public and private systems so more patients get the care they need in a timely manner, and I hope the member and the Labour Party would support such an initiative.

Hon Dr Ayesha Verrall: Will he respond to vascular surgeons in Nelson Hospital who are saying people on the wait lists are having unnecessary emergency amputations because of the lack of surgeons, and will he allow Nelson to fully staff its hospital?

Hon SIMEON BROWN: There are more clinical staff working at Nelson Hospital today than there was when she was the Minister—there are more there today than when she was the Minister—and what I would say to the member is that is why we have put a team into Nelson Hospital to work with the local staff and to make sure there are teams working across the Nelson-Marlborough region to get patients the treatment they need in a more timely manner. I do not accept that the patients in Nelson are getting the timely treatment they need. Those wait lists are unacceptable, and that is why we are taking action.

Question No. 9—Workplace Relations and Safety

9. CAMERON LUXTON (ACT) to the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety: What recent announcements has the Government made about delivering on the ACT-National coalition commitment to reform health and safety law and regulations?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety): The ACT-National coalition commitment set the ambitious task of reforming health and safety law and regulations. We're only halfway through the week, but I can tell you that this week is a week of health and safety announcements. So far, I've announced that Cabinet has agreed to: a carve-out for small, low-risk businesses from general health and safety at work requirements; free-up land for recreational use by ensuring landowners will not be responsible if someone is injured on their land while doing recreational activities; clarify the distinction between governance and operational management, health and safety responsibilities, to reduce directors' fear and risk of over-compliance; make critical risk the primary purpose of the Health and Safety at Work Act, and clarify the boundaries between the Act and regulatory systems that already manage the same risk; and set up a hotline for reporting excessive road cone use. This is just the start of the reform programme that will be over the next coming months.

Cameron Luxton: How do the announced changes respond to feedback received from the health and safety roadshow?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: Last year, I travelled the country from Whangārei to Bluff, hearing directly from businesses, workers, and iwi about their experiences with the health and safety system. I had the privilege of talking to everyone from farmers to tradies to roadworkers. I heard that while larger businesses may be able to afford to hire dedicated health and safety professionals, small businesses in particular can struggle to get the information they need to ensure they are compliant, and can also struggle with the costs of compliance. I also heard concerns that the scope of workplace health and safety obligations is creeping into unintended areas of life, from hiking to Santa parades. My announced changes will reduce tick-box health and safety activities, and give workers assurance that their workplaces are prioritising the right actions to protect them from harm.

SPEAKER: Conciseness in answers would be useful.

Cameron Luxton: What differences will workplaces that are small, low-risk businesses experience as the result from these announced changes?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: I know the struggle small businesses face in dealing with red tape and regulation, and this change will help them focus on what matters most. What these changes mean in practice is that businesses would no longer need to worry about putting up signs warning workers that the water coming out of a hot-water tap is hot, or that they should hold onto the stair banister. If a worker is working from home, businesses would no longer need to have a plan for how to deal with the risk that the worker might get lonely. I want to see small businesses focusing on the critical risks: dangerous machines, hazardous substances, and other risks that can cause serious injury, illness, or death.

Cameron Luxton: How will the announced changes reduce excessive use of road cones?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: WorkSafe will be manning a hotline for the public to report on excessive road cone use. It will then be WorkSafe's job to provide confirmation and guidance on instances of road cone over-compliance, to help the New Zealand Transport Agency get in the new risk-based traffic management guide. Having WorkSafe focus on this pilot for 12 months will be a culture shift for the agency, but it signifies the broader direction this Government is taking the health and safety system.

Cameron Luxton: Supplementary.

SPEAKER: Yes, good, and then we'll have a concise answer.

CAMERON LUXTON: Thank you. How will the announced changes improve access to land for recreational use?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: This week I announced that Cabinet had agreed to the legislative change that landowners will not be responsible if someone is injured on their land while doing recreational activities. I've heard from a wide range of representatives of the Kiwi public, who believe these changes will improve access to land for their particular recreational hobby, from deerstalkers to the Federated Mountain Clubs of New Zealand. I expect that hikers, trampers, fishers, deerstalkers, people who love the great outdoors will have more access to it.

SPEAKER: Question No. 10, the Hon Deborah Russell. Just wait for a moment while everyone settles down.

Question No. 10—Climate Change

10. Hon Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL (Labour) to the Minister of Climate Change: Is he committed to New Zealand staying in the Paris Agreement?

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON (Minister for ACC) on behalf of the Minister of Climate Change: Yes.

Hon Dr Deborah Russell: Who represents the New Zealand Government: the Prime Minister, who said pulling out of the Paris Agreement is "the fastest way to make New Zealand incredibly poor", or the Minister of Foreign Affairs, who said Paris "is an international agreement that National went and signed up to … and nobody knows why"?

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: On behalf of the Minister, what I can confirm for that member, who was a previous Minister, is that this coalition Government is completely committed to its international and domestic climate change agreements.

Hon Dr Deborah Russell: Does he agree with David Seymour, who said that the zero carbon Act is wrong and the Paris accord is wrong?

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: On behalf of the Minister, what other parties say about policy or their own ideas is their business, and I have no responsibility for that.

Hon Dr Deborah Russell: Does he agree with trade expert Stephen Jacobi, who said calls for New Zealand to leave the Paris Agreement are "completely mad" as it would mean the loss of market access and would come with significant economic and reputational cost?

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: On behalf of the Minister, I want to reiterate this coalition's commitment to the international and domestic commitments that we have signed up to, and the member asking the question well knows that.

Hon Dr Deborah Russell: What confidence can New Zealanders have in this Government's climate commitments, which are integral to our trade agreements, when his coalition partners are attacking their foundations?

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: Well, I'm not sure whether the member has been listening to my answers, but I want to reiterate that this coalition Government is firmly committed to its international and domestic obligations, and I'm very confident that we can continue along that path. There is still work to do; lots of progress is being made.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Supplementary question.

Hon Willie Jackson: Oh, here he is—add him into it.

SPEAKER: And there it will be goodbye to that member too, very shortly.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: Is it not wise, Minister, for any smart, intelligent political party, or, dare I say it, a Government, to constantly re-examine the premise on which former policy was made to ensure that the principles on which decisions were made are still accurate and still working?

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: The Deputy Prime Minister makes a very good point, because, surely, New Zealand is the only country on the planet that is transitioning from gas to coal. [Interruption]

SPEAKER: Good—when everyone's ready, question No. 11, Dr Hamish Campbell.

Question No. 11—Commerce and Consumer Affairs

11. Dr HAMISH CAMPBELL (National—Ilam) to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs: What recent steps has the Government taken to unlock data and increase competition?

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs): Last week, the Government passed the Customer and Product Data Act. That's an Act that provides a framework for open banking, open electricity, and open other economic sectors as well. This is a piece of legislation that will increase competition by giving Kiwis more control and power over their data currently held by other entities with whom they trade. So the idea is that they will ultimately be able to get a much better deal, increase competition, and Kiwi customers and Kiwi consumers will be the better for it.

Dr Hamish Campbell: How will these changes impact Kiwis?

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: Kiwis deserve to get the best bang for their buck. The change that this legislation enables will mean that there is a better sharing of consumers' data with, of course, their consent and that will help them more easily shop around for best deals.

Dr Hamish Campbell: What next steps is the Government taking in this space?

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: The framework now being in place means that the first cab off the rank in terms of the open sector framework that this is providing will be the banking sector. This is done through what's known as open banking and it allows people to share their bank data with other apps or services to get better, more tailored financial options.

Dr Hamish Campbell: What do these changes look like in practice?

Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: Well, very good question from the member. An example of open banking from our good friends in Australia is an app called NextGen ApplyOnline, and that's a service that speeds up home loan applications for customers while also reducing fraud risk. And another example is Rocket Money from the United States, which finds forgotten or unwanted subscription services and helps customers cancel them. I'm hoping to see similar services on our shores soon.

Question No. 12—Workplace Relations and Safety

12. TEANAU TUIONO (Green) to the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety: What are the current costs of workplace deaths and injuries in Aotearoa, and what is the modelled impact, if any, of her health and safety reforms on this cost?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety): Officials inform me that it is difficult to reliably estimate the costs of workplace deaths, injuries, and illness in New Zealand. By that, they mean it's hard to establish causation. Basically, you can't predict the future of such a wide range of individual human actions. I am aware, however, that the Business Leaders' Health and Safety Forum has estimated the total burden of workplace harm at $4.9 billion in 2024. Given the difficulties in estimating costs and drivers of harm, my officials have not modelled the impact of health and safety reforms on this cost, but it has been clear, from my roadshows and consultation, that a lot of effort is going into ineffective paper-based compliance, which doesn't reduce the harm. My reforms focus on real actions to reduce harm.

Teanau Tuiono: How does she justify weakening health and safety protections for workers in small businesses when ACC data suggests that workers in small businesses are 57 percent more likely to suffer an injury than their counterparts in large businesses?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: I'm not weakening health and safety; I'm refocusing health and safety on critical risks. One of the clear parts of my consultation came back saying that small businesses are spending a lot of time on paper-based compliance. They're not sure if it's actually having any effect on reducing harm, but what we do know is we want people to focus on those critical risks that are causing death, serious injury, and illness in workplaces. And that's what this Government is committed to doing.

Teanau Tuiono: Does she accept evidence from WorkSafe that musculoskeletal harm, such as back injuries, are the number one cause of workplace harm in New Zealand, and, if so, will she include musculoskeletal harm in her definition of critical risk?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: The member will simply have to wait for the legislative drafting of the bill to come back with the definitions of critical risk.

Teanau Tuiono: Does she accept that the second biggest cause of workplace harm in Aotearoa is mental harm, associated with around 40 work-related suicides each year, and, if so, will she include mental harm in her definition of critical risk?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: Like I said, the member will simply have to wait for the legislation to come back, and he can have a say at select committee on the specific definitions. But what I will say is we are seeing far too much compliance cost. We want people to be focused on those critical risks of serious injury and death at work. Businesses have far too much red tape and regulation, and they need our help as a Government to clarify the law on where their focus should be.

Teanau Tuiono: Since she and the Prime Minister have committed to "all Kiwis returning home safe after every working day", will she resign as Minister if her reforms result in increased workplace deaths or injuries?

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: Unfortunately for the member, I'm not going anywhere.

© Scoop Media