Wednesday, 7 June 2023 [Volume 768] Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m. KARAKIA/PRAYERS Hon JACQUI DEAN (Assistant Speaker): Almighty God, we give thanks for the blessings which have been bestowed on us. Laying aside all personal interests, we acknowledge the King and pray for guidance in our deliberations, that we may conduct the affairs of this House with wisdom, justice, mercy, and humility for the welfare and peace of New Zealand. Amen. VISITORS Australia—House of Representatives Standing Committee on Regional Development, Infrastructure and Transport SPEAKER: I am sure that members would wish to welcome members of the Australian House of Representatives' Standing Committee on Regional Development, Infrastructure and Transport, Luke Gosling and the Hon Scott Buchholz, who are present in the gallery. SPEAKER'S RULINGS Oral Questions—Members Quoting Partial Statements SPEAKER: Members, following a point of order from the Leader of the House, I've decided to make the following ruling. It is both the longstanding practice of this House and exceedingly common for members to use excerpts in questions—Speakers' ruling 177/7. Standing Order 390 explicitly states that questions must be concise, which means quotations of any great length will be ruled out of order. Members asking questions may choose which part of a Minister's statement to quote, as long as they do so accurately, can authenticate it, and do not misrepresent the statement—for example, by failing to include the word "not" or similar. If words are missed from the middle of a quote, an ellipsis must be used—Speaker's ruling 178/3—and the missing words cannot fundamentally change the meaning of the quote; if they do, the question will not be allowed. In return, a Minister can choose how much context they wish to include in their answer. All members will be familiar with the phrase "I stand by my full statement in the context in which it was made". The answer is so familiar as to be routine in this House and only underlines the accepted practice of quoting partial statements. PETITIONS, PAPERS, SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS, AND INTRODUCTION OF BILLS SPEAKER: Petitions have been delivered to the Clerk for presentation. CLERK: Petition of Jody Hopkinson for Humans of Family Court Aotearoa requesting that the House act so warrants can't be issued to social workers and police to take children, and that people cannot use allegations of parental alienation to avoid accountability for abuse. Petition of Kevin Scott requesting that the House amend legislation to require holders of on-licences and club licences to provide a range of zero-alcohol beers, wines, and spirits in addition to existing requirements to supply a reasonable range of zero-alcohol and low-alcohol products. Petition of Theresa Zame requesting that the House amend the Therapeutic Products Bill regarding patients importing prescription meds, clinical trials through the SCOTT Committee, and the definition of "advertisement" so it does not risk criminalising patients, advocates & media. SPEAKER: Those petitions are referred to the Petitions Committee. No papers have been delivered for presentation. Select committee reports have been delivered for presentation. CLERK: Report of the Education and Workforce Committee on the briefing on the 2021/22 annual reviews interim report Report of the Finance and Expenditure Committee on the Water Services Economic Efficiency and Consumer Protection Bill. SPEAKER: The bill is set down for second reading, and the briefing is set down for consideration. The Clerk has been informed of the introduction of a bill. CLERK: Emergency Management Bill, introduction. SPEAKER: That bill is set down for first reading. ORAL QUESTIONS QUESTIONS TO MINISTERS Question No. 1—Health 1. Dr ANAE NERU LEAVASA (Labour—Takanini) to the Minister of Health: What recent announcement has she made about curbing youth vaping? Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Minister of Health): Yesterday, I was pleased to announce, alongside the Prime Minister, a suite of measures to reduce the number of young people taking up vaping. By next year, all vaping devices sold in New Zealand will need to have removable or replaceable batteries. This could limit the sale of cheap, disposable vapes that are popular among young people. We also want vapes as far from the minds and reach of children and young people as possible, so any locations within 300 metres of schools and marae will be off limits for new specialist vape shops. All vapes need child safety mechanisms, and potentially enticing names—which accompany far too many products—will be prohibited. These new regulations build on protections that the Labour Government introduced in 2020, including banning sales to under-18s and prohibiting vape advertising and sponsorship. Dr Anae Neru Leavasa: Why is the Government making these changes? Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: Youth vaping is becoming increasingly prevalent, with many choosing to vape despite having never smoked. Alongside our efforts to reduce tobacco smoking, we want to ensure vaping products are safe, regulated, and primarily being used for smoking cessation purposes, as intended. We've heard from parents and other family members and from teachers and principals, all of whom are concerned at the prospect that a lifelong bad habit is becoming established for many at a young age. We're creating a future where tobacco products are no longer addictive, appealing, or as readily available; the same needs to apply to vaping. Dr Anae Neru Leavasa: How will these changes improve the health of young New Zealanders? Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: Vaping has played an important role in the record reduction of New Zealanders smoking over the last few years. But it is not entirely without harms, and too many young people are vaping. Alongside these changes, a health promotion campaign is already under way to encourage young people to live vape-free lives. Through a co-design process with rangatahi, Te Whatu Ora developed Protect Your Breath, which launched on social media last year. We're taking an evidence-based approach, working to protect youth from the appeal and attractiveness of vaping. Dr Anae Neru Leavasa: What feedback has been received about these proposals? Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: There has been significant positive feedback following the announcement. Jacqui Brown, principal of New Plymouth Girls' High School said, "[Changes] to disposable vapes is probably the strongest step because I think that helps young people from starting to vape." Hāpai Te Hauora commended the announcement, saying, "[It] is a praiseworthy commitment to safeguarding the hauora of communities, rangatahi and tamariki." Question No. 2—Prime Minister 2. NICOLA WILLIS (Deputy Leader—National) to the Prime Minister: On what occasions did the Cabinet Office ask Minister Michael Wood whether he'd divested his shares in Auckland Airport and, in each instance, what commitments, if any, did the Minister make to the Cabinet Office about any next steps he would take? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Prime Minister): I asked the Cabinet Office to provide a detailed time line of their interactions, and following a review of the records, I have been advised that on 19 November 2020, 9 and 14 December 2020, 24 March 2021, 30 June 2021, 17 December 2021, 1 March 2022, 28 March 2022, 4 May 2022, 16 January 2023, 6 March 2023, and 27 March 2023, the Cabinet Office sought to confirm whether he had divested the shareholding. Throughout the process, Michael Wood confirmed that he was about to or was in the process of divesting the shareholdings. Nicola Willis: How many times did the Cabinet Office ask Michael Wood to divest his shares or whether he had divested his shares, and on how many occasions had Minister Wood failed to do so? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: By my count, the interaction—there were 12 interactions. Nicola Willis: Does he think it was honest of Michael Wood to on 12 occasions commit to divest his shares, but then on 12 occasions fail to do so? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: As I indicated yesterday, I think he should have divested the shares when he first said he was going to. Nicola Willis: Why does Minister Wood retain his position in Cabinet when on 12 occasions he failed to meet his commitment to the Cabinet Office and when there is an ongoing investigation into his conduct with clear evidence that he failed to appropriately manage conflicts of interest? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I have indicated that I don't think Minister Wood had met the relevant expectations, and that is the reason he has been stood down as Minister of Transport. Nicola Willis: Why is he still in a Minister when on 12 occasions he misled the Cabinet Office into believing he was divesting his shares, but failed on 12 occasions to do so? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Mr Speaker, that was the same question that she just asked, and the answer is the same. Nicola Willis: If Minister Wood had been clear that he had not sold his shares in Auckland Airport, then why didn't the Cabinet Office, which the Prime Minister is responsible for, ensure that they were noted on the Cabinet Office register of ministerial conflicts of interest until such time as they were sold? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Ultimately, that's a decision for the Cabinet Office. I think the first that I was made aware of the shareholding was over the weekend or on Friday, which was when my office was made aware of that. In terms of why they didn't signal that, I'm somewhat frustrated that when I was doing the reshuffle, which the Cabinet Office were consulted on, they had not highlighted that as an issue for me. Nicola Willis: Is it good enough for the Prime Minister to be "somewhat frustrated" when again and again his Cabinet Ministers and the Cabinet Office appear not to be enforcing the rules of Cabinet as set out in the Cabinet Manual, and has the Prime Minister considered simply locking his Ministers in a room for an hour, telling them to read it, and then to apply it? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: In answer to the first part of the question: no, it's not acceptable. Nicola Willis: Can he assure New Zealanders that all his Ministers have appropriately declared all conflicts of interest to the Cabinet Office and that those interests have been appropriately managed? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: It is my expectation that Ministers will follow the rules around conflict of interest. Those rules are clear, and where there is any evidence that they haven't, then I will deal with that. Nicola Willis: Will he now authorise an independent investigation into how it is that on 12 separate occasions, Minister Wood told the Cabinet Office he was selling his shares, but on 12 separate occasions failed to do so, and will the Prime Minister stand Minister Wood down from his ministerial duties for the duration of that investigation? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I don't believe that there is a need to have an investigation on that matter, because the facts are clear and they are not contested. David Seymour: Were the communications between Minister Wood and the Cabinet Office written or spoken, and if written, will he release the correspondence to the public? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: A mixture of both, and the Cabinet Office's records of course are subject to the Official Information Act. Question No.3—Regional Development 3. TERISA NGOBI (Labour—Ōtaki) to the Minister for Regional Development: What announcements has she made about investment into our regional economies? Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN (Minister for Regional Development): On 25 May I announced a further round of investment from the Regional Strategic Partnership Fund, with $24 million allocated to 10 diverse projects up and down the country. Our regions are the backbone of our economy, and these projects build on the Government's investment to boost regional economic resilience and set up our communities so that they continue to thrive in the future. As at 25 May, around $3.2 billion has been paid out from Kānoa-managed funds to support our region's economies, and 1,148 projects have been completed. Terisa Ngobi: What projects from the Waikato received funding from the Regional Strategic Partnership Fund as part of this announcement? Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: A $1.1 million loan for Clean Technology for Fertiliser, to support the construction of a new geothermal energy uplink which will provide process heat in the manufacturing of slow release fertiliser membranes; a $4 million loan to He Ahi Limited Partnership for the development and construction of an industrial park with geothermal process heat options; and a $3 million grant to the South Waikato District Council for development of the Maraetai Road Intermodal Business Park. Terisa Ngobi: What projects from the East Coast and Hawke's Bay received funding from the Regional Strategic Partnership Fund as part of this announcement? Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: Fantastic region. With respect to the East Coast: on the East Coast a $4 million loan to Judds Composting for construction of a facility to allow an existing composting operation to take in other waste streams from in and near Gisborne. In the Hawke's Bay, a $2 million to bbi Wood Products to expand a Building Futures programme for disadvantaged youth, as well as training and employment initiatives; and a $3.5 million loan to Ngāti Pāhauwera Commercial Development Limited for developing the initial phase of a 60-hectare orchard near Wairoa, for horticulture. Terisa Ngobi: What other projects received funding from the Regional Strategic Partnership Fund as part of this announcement? Hon KIRITAPU ALLAN: And the member that just questioned me—a fantastic electorate of Ōtaki: a $2 million loan to 26 Seasons Limited for the Foxton Scale Up Project, to support growth of indoor hydroponics-based horticulture business; in Nelson, a $2.5 million loan to SnapIT to support manufacturing and development of its live camera artificial intelligence hardware and satellite communication system technology—perhaps the Leader of the Opposition might be able to make some use of that—and in Timaru, a $500,000 grant to the Fraser Park Redevelopment Trust for the transmission of the Fraser Park facility into a multi-event arena. Question No. 4—Prime Minister 4. DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT) to the Prime Minister: Is he confident that officials and Ministers are making decisions transparently and impartially? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Prime Minister): Broadly, yes. Ministers and officials make a broad range of decisions, each governed by different processes and considerations. The high-quality nature of those decisions, and the accountability and review mechanisms for decision makers in those decisions, is a core feature of New Zealand's Government, and one of the main reasons for New Zealand's renowned for transparency, good governance, and ease of business. Brooke van Velden: How can a developer applying for a subdivision consent be confident the independent hearings commissioner does not have an investment in a competing subdivision, when the Prime Minister couldn't trust his own transport Minister to declare shares of Auckland Airport when declining "airport authority" status to the North Shore Aerodrome? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Those two things are completely unrelated. But if the member has any evidence of the first, I'd encourage her to share it. Chris Baillie: How can a humble pub owner applying for a liquor licence under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act be sure that the district licencing committee members haven't invested in a competing pub, when the Prime Minister couldn't trust his own transport Minister to declare shares in Auckland Airport when declining "airport authority" status to the North Shore Aerodrome? Hon Grant Robertson: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Two parts of a question need to have something to do with each other. I think we can see what's being attempted here by the ACT Party, but I can't see how the first part of that question is in order as a question to a Minister—the Prime Minister, in this case. SPEAKER: The primary question has quite a wide scope to it. The Prime Minister is basically responsible for everything that the Government does, so I'm going to allow the question. But like I've warned members before, especially when they get more than one lead to a question or it's not particularly—if you're wanting a specific answer like that, you may not get that. David Seymour: Is he going to answer the question, Mr Speaker? SPEAKER: Yes. The question's been asked and the Prime Minister will address it. Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The two issues that the member raised in the question are completely unrelated. Again, the allegation in the first part of the question is a serious one. If the member has any evidence that that has happened, then he should produce it. But in answer to the second part of the question, the Minister concerned had declared the shares. Simon Court: How can miners applying for mining permits under the Crown Minerals Act be confident that the responsible Minister hasn't invested in a competing mine, when the Prime Minister couldn't trust his own transport Minister to declare shares in Auckland Airport when declining "airport authority" status to the North Shore Aerodrome? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Again, that's a very serious allegation that the member has made in the first part of the question. If he has any evidence at all to back up the allegation that he's just made, then he should produce it. Dr James McDowall: How can he be confident that nobody approving or declining Callaghan Innovation grants has an undisclosed share in the applicant or their competitors, when the Prime Minister couldn't trust his own transport Minister to declare shares in Auckland Airport when declining airport authority status to the North Shore Aerodrome? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: If the member has any evidence to back up the claim he's made in the first part of the question, he should produce it. Karen Chhour: How can people dealing with Oranga Tamariki (OT) be confident with OT staff making decisions to put children in foster families' care don't have undisclosed interests in the adopting families, when the Prime Minister couldn't trust his own transport Minister to declare shares in Auckland Airport when declining airport authority status to the North Shore Aerodrome? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I think that's an absolutely disgraceful way of abusing a system that's designed to protect children, and the member should know better. Damien Smith: How can overseas investors be confident that nobody in the Overseas Investment Office making decisions about— Hon Dr David Clark: He's using a dead baby's passport. Damien Smith: —the application has shares— David Seymour: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I just heard David Clark make a pretty outrageous heckle which, first of all, he shouldn't be speaking; questions should be heard in silence; and, second of all, he might like to consider withdrawing the remark that he made, if he feels that's appropriate. Hon Grant Robertson: Speaking to the point of order, Mr Speaker, it has occurred a few times, in your reign as Speaker, where the nature of questions has led people to interject during them. We've just had a succession of questions from the ACT Party that have impugned a range of public servants, public service agencies, and Ministers, and I don't think it's surprising, in light of those questions, that there will be interjections during them. Hon Gerry Brownlee: Speaking to the point of order, Mr Speaker, it's not for individual members in this House to determine the appropriateness or otherwise of a question—that's you're your job. That's why we have collectively supported you in the chair. And the questions that were asked from the ACT Party may not be comfortable for people who are hearing those questions, but they are, none the less, legitimately asked and should, wherever possible, in the public interest, be given an answer. Hon Grant Robertson: Speaking to that point of order. SPEAKER: Do you have to? Quite clearly, the questions being asked have upset some members of the House. That doesn't automatically mean that they're out of order. I have allowed the questions to be asked, and members of the public will make their own judgment around them. But I thank the father of the House for his intervention. Hon Members: Grandfather. SPEAKER: Yeah, well—I think I'm acknowledging the experience of the member and his contribution. So whilst members might not like what they're hearing, in terms of the question, the member does have the right to ask it. Would you like to ask it again? Damien Smith: How can overseas investors be confident that nobody in the Overseas Investment Office making decisions about their application has shares in land or companies affected by the investment, when the Prime Minister couldn't trust his own transport Minister to declare shares in Auckland Airport when declining airport authority status to the North Shore Aerodrome? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I'm absolutely satisfied that if any of the very serious allegations that the ACT members have raised in any of their questions have any basis of fact, that there are systems in place to deal with them. Question No. 5—Defence 5. DAN ROSEWARNE (Labour) to the Minister of Defence: What progress has been made on the procurement of Bushmaster protected armoured vehicles? Hon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister of Defence): Last month, I had the pleasure of visiting the Trentham Military Camp to mark the arrival of the first 18 Bushmaster protected mobility vehicles in New Zealand. This Government has purchased a total of 43 Bushmasters to replace the ageing Pinzgauers. The remaining vehicles will be arriving in the coming months. The Bushmasters are a world-class land defence platform designed to carry out a range of tasks from protected troop transport, ambulance response, mobile command, and advanced communications. They will ensure our army is ready to respond to the range of national security threats New Zealand faces both here and abroad, from extreme weather and natural disaster response to search and rescue to peacekeeping and security missions. Dan Rosewarne: How much has the Government invested into Bushmaster procurement programmes? Hon ANDREW LITTLE: The Government has invested $106 million to procure the 43 vehicles, including spares and supporting systems. In Budget 2023, we committed a further $58 million to equip the Bushmasters with world-class, secure communications. That was the appropriate time to green-light this investment because it allows us to apply the very latest partner interoperability and cyber-security standards. Like all significant defence procurement projects, we should expect to see ongoing upgrades to the Bushmasters' platform over time. Dan Rosewarne: Where would the Bushmasters be stationed? Hon ANDREW LITTLE: After the delivery and commissioning phases, the fleet will be stationed at Linton and Burnham army bases. This means there will be Bushmasters ready to respond to extreme weather events and natural disasters in both the North and the South Islands. Dan Rosewarne: What reaction has he seen from the troops to the arrival of the Bushmasters? Hon ANDREW LITTLE: The feedback has been overwhelmingly positive. One lance corporal was quoted in the media saying, "we've definitely moved up there in the world" and the Bushmasters "will make a big difference to the role our soldiers play overseas". A number of defence personnel and officials told me about the pride they feel in this programme having now delivered in what is almost record time for defence procurement—and I know that the Minister of Finance is thrilled about that as well—from Cabinet sign-off in June 2020 to the first Bushmasters being unveiled last month. I would like to take this opportunity to thank all the soldiers, officers, and civilian staff who have contributed to the delivery. And, of course, I thank one of my predecessors, or my predecessor but one, the Hon Ron Mark, who initiated the programme. Dan Rosewarne: How does the investment into Bushmasters align with the Government's wider investments into defence? Hon ANDREW LITTLE: The Bushmasters are part of the more than $4.5 billion this Government has invested into strengthening our defence capability across land, sea, and air. This includes four new P-8A Poseidon aircraft, five C130J Super Hercules, and upgrades to our frigates. In Budget 2023, we've also invested in housing upgrades and the largest pay increases for our defence personnel in a decade. This is a Government committed to New Zealand having a defence force that is ready to respond and protect our national security. Question No. 6—Auckland 6. Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National) to the Minister for Auckland: Does he stand by all his statements and actions? Hon MICHAEL WOOD (Minister for Auckland): Yes, in their full context. Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does he stand by his statements to the Cabinet Office about his personal shareholdings in Auckland International Airport? Hon MICHAEL WOOD: Yes, I do, in their full context. Hon Paul Goldsmith: And if he stated to the Cabinet Office that he was going to sell his shares in Auckland Airport, why didn't he sell them? Hon MICHAEL WOOD: I commenced the process of selling those shares in early 2022. I regret that I did not complete it. That is an issue that I am focused on fixing now. Hon Paul Goldsmith: Did he not say to the Cabinet Office in late 2020 that he was going to sell them, and why did he only start in 2022? Hon MICHAEL WOOD: It's important to note that I declared all of my shareholdings to the Cabinet Office at the time that I became Minister. They did provide advice to me on a number of occasions that I should have sold them. I regret that I did not pursue that as quickly as I should have. That is the process that I am focused on fixing now. Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does he acknowledge that for a Minister not to do something he has told the Cabinet Office he will do, once, is a mistake, but to do it twice as the Minister for Auckland and another 10 times before can only be either deliberate concealment or rank incompetence; and if so, which one is it? Hon MICHAEL WOOD: The member's assertion is wrong. I only became the Minister for Auckland in February of this year. Hon Paul Goldsmith: Point of order, Mr Speaker. We just heard from the Prime Minister that he was asked twice during the time he was the Minister for Auckland by the Cabinet Office whether he'd sold his shares or not. SPEAKER: Either way, the question was addressed. Hon Paul Goldsmith: Does he agree with the characterisation of his performance over the shares in The Post this morning as, "creeping incompetence"? Hon MICHAEL WOOD: I agree that I should have sold the shares more quickly than I did. I deeply regret that I did not. My focus now is on fixing that issue. Hon Paul Goldsmith: During his meetings with the Mayor of Auckland, when the conversation turned to tourism and Auckland's connectivity, did he disclose to the mayor his personal shareholding in Auckland Airport? Hon MICHAEL WOOD: No, I did not, but I note that I did publicly disclose that shareholding on the register of pecuniary interests in early 2022. Hon Paul Goldsmith: Did he have any conversations with the mayor or with any unions about the council's proposed sale of Auckland Airport shares? Hon MICHAEL WOOD: I have had no conversations of that kind. On a number of occasions, the major has spoken to me in general terms about his budget process, and I have said to him, as I have said publicly, that that is a matter for Auckland Council. Question No. 7—Oceans and Fisheries 7. Hon EUGENIE SAGE (Green) to the Minister for Oceans and Fisheries: Is she confident that the vision that "New Zealanders work towards zero fishing-related … mortalities" in the National Plan of Action – Seabirds 2020 is resulting in significant progress to protect seabirds; if not, will she ensure stronger action is taken? Hon RACHEL BROOKING (Minister for Oceans and Fisheries): Yes, I am confident in this vision and the significant progress being achieved by this plan. This plan has four goals: avoiding bycatch, healthy seabird populations, research and information, and international engagement. Preliminary 2020-21 estimations indicate a downward trend in seabird captures. This is a result of a comprehensive programme of scientific research, monitoring, and active management currently under way to achieve these goals. There is more work to do but Aotearoa's seabirds are a precious taonga, and I want to make sure they're here for future generations. Hon Eugenie Sage: What, if any, further work does the Minister consider is needed before making all three best-practice mitigation measures for surface longlining, tori streamer lines, weighted lines, and night setting compulsory to reduce seabird bycatch and address the "low uptake of voluntary measures" identified by Fisheries New Zealand in its 2022 review? Hon RACHEL BROOKING: A review of the surface longline mitigation regulations is currently under way. The consultation closed on Friday, 12 May. Submissions are currently being assessed and I will receive advice on those shortly. As the member said, this consultation addressed the three out of three mitigation measures on surface longline vessels and whether they should be applied at all times. That is, a tori line—or a bird scaring line—setting at night, and weighting the line. So I'm awaiting that advice. Hon Eugenie Sage: Is the Minister satisfied that the numbers of reported seabird mortalities in surface longline fisheries are accurate, when observed effort of surface longline hooks in 2020-21 was only 11 percent? Hon RACHEL BROOKING: I don't have information about that specific issue to hand; I'm happy to provide it in a written question. Hon Eugenie Sage: What action, if any, is the Minister considering to avoid seabirds being killed by bottom longline and trawl fisheries, when each of these fishing methods captures more seabirds each year than surface longlining, between 1,400 and 2,598 birds in the case of bottom longlining in 2019-20? Hon RACHEL BROOKING: The plan has an annual report and there are review processes in that. At the moment, it's focused on the longline, and it will look at these other mitigation measures as well. Hon Eugenie Sage: What does the Minister say to BirdLife International, who predict that the critically threatened antipodean albatross will be made extinct by 2050 because of deaths from commercial fishing bycatch and a population which has declined by more than two-thirds since 2005? Hon RACHEL BROOKING: Protection for the antipodean albatross is an issue that needs to be solved with the international community, and New Zealand is leading the measures internationally to help protect these majestic seabirds. We do have a lot of research under way and are actively working with other countries to understand where the risks to seabirds are occurring across the Southern Hemisphere, and how best to manage these risks. The proposals to strengthen the seabird mitigation in surface longline fishing that I've just discussed and will receive advice on soon will help with that. Hon Eugenie Sage: With no significant improvement over the last 10 years in the number of protected seabirds killed each year, will the Minister consider using her powers under the Fisheries Act to establish mortality limits for seabird species after which fishing stops; if not, why not? Hon RACHEL BROOKING: I will continue asking officials for advice on the best mitigation measures. Question No. 8—Rural Communities 8. ANNA LORCK (Labour—Tukituki) to the Minister for Rural Communities: What recent reports has he received on Government support to cyclone-affected rural communities? Hon KIERAN McANULTY (Minister for Rural Communities): I receive regular updates on the Government's work to support rural communities to recover from Cyclone Gabrielle. I can confirm that, as of 6 June 2023, $62.8 million has been paid out in recovery grants to farmers and growers for 5,474 impacted properties. There are also specific recovery projects that have been funded through a fully committed $4 million mobilisation fund. These grants have gone towards immediate cost of recovery following the cyclone. I acknowledge that many of these farmers and growers continue to do it tough, so I'm regularly meeting with them to get on-the-ground perspectives on what further support is needed. Anna Lorck: What projects have been supported through the $4 million mobilisation fund? Hon KIERAN McANULTY: I've been advised that the fund has been fully committed to projects covering aerial surveys, mental wellbeing, recovery advice, logistics, and reimbursement of costs of urgent response activity. Since the start of March, Operation Muster has facilitated the transport of more than 45,000 livestock off Hawke's Bay farms left cut off following Cyclone Gabrielle. The areas covered include Patoka, Rissington, Dartmoor, Puketitiri, Tutira, Putorino, and Waikoau. More than 6,000 tonnes of critical supplies have been delivered to cut-off rural communities in Tairāwhiti, but through Operation Reach the support is ensuring vital supplies get to farmers and growers left isolated by severed transport links. Anna Lorck: What further support has been announced through Budget 2023? Hon KIERAN McANULTY: Budget 2023 allocated a further $35.4 million to support the recovery of rural communities. This is broken down into a $5.4 million fund for the North Island Weather Event Isolated Rural Communities Recovery Fund and a $30 million for the North Island Weather Event Time-Critical Primary Industries Recovery Fund. The Ministry for Primary Industries is seeking expressions of interest from industry partners, including industry good organisations, community groups, and Māori entities that can provide supplies and services in affected regions. Anna Lorck: How will the $5.4 million isolated rural communities fund be used? Hon KIERAN McANULTY: This funding will be used for activities which deliver support for impacted rural communities, including support for marae or other suitable facilities in communities to provide hub locations and supporting the hub's operations; funding community groups and support networks to coordinate community-led recovery and increase community members' access to the support needed for their recovery; helping community groups to cover the logistical cost of operating in severely impacted regions; the development of iwi-led wellbeing initiatives supporting community hubs to host regular community clinics and events; and the delivery of specialised support and information resources, support for maintenance of telecommunications links, supply of materials and equipment to community hubs, and movement of community coordinators and specialist advisers into and around isolated regions. Anna Lorck: What support is available for the management and removal of silt and debris in Hawke's Bay? Hon KIERAN McANULTY: Applications for the sediment and silt recovery fund have opened today. Available funding includes grants of up to $40,000 and further funding of up to $210,000 on a 50:50 cost-share basis. Applications can be made directly to the Hawke's Bay Regional Council. Question No. 9—Education 9. ERICA STANFORD (National—East Coast Bays) to the Minister of Education: Does she stand by all her statements and actions? Hon KELVIN DAVIS (Associate Minister of Education (Māori Education)) on behalf of the Minister of Education: On behalf of the Minister, in the context they were given, yes. Erica Stanford: How many students are not enrolled in school, based on the latest data she has seen? Hon KELVIN DAVIS: I don't have that information directly to hand, and if she wanted specific information on that subject, she should have put it in the primary question. Erica Stanford: Is the reason the numbers of non-enrolled students are not reported in the publicly released attendance data because her office requested this data be omitted? Hon KELVIN DAVIS: On behalf of the Minister, no. Erica Stanford: Why is it that the number of young people who've completely disengaged from the education system is not released to the public alongside other attendance data? Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Look, I don't have a specific answer to that question. Again, that's something I think she should put in writing to our Minister, and the Minister's office will get back to her. Erica Stanford: Is the reason she isn't proactively publicly releasing the number of young people unenrolled from school because under this Government, that number is two and a half times higher after six years in office; and will she commit to regularly publishing the number of unenrolled students with the rest of the attendance data? Hon KELVIN DAVIS: There were about three questions in that—no. Question No. 10—Digital Economy and Communications 10. GLEN BENNETT (Labour—New Plymouth) to the Minister for the Digital Economy and Communications: What recent announcements has the Government made about boosting our digital workforce? Hon GINNY ANDERSEN (Minister for the Digital Economy and Communications): Budget 2023 lays the foundations for a low-emissions, high-wage economy, with major investments into our digital and tech sectors. The Government is investing $27 million in a digital skills package that will focus on growing the tech sector workforce under the Digital Technologies Industry ITP—Industry Transformation Plan. Funding will support the development of apprenticeship-like pilot programmes that will include support for both trainees and employers to make the most of these pathways into employment. We're supporting these pilots so people can earn while they learn and also get industry experience while they study. Glen Bennett: What else will the digital skills package be supporting? Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: We're also, then, supporting in-school outreach programmes. These programmes are designed to provide students with the opportunity to get a real view of the industry by highlighting tech careers and integrating the skills needed into their education programme. This includes integrating in-school learning and work-based learning with local employers. For example, students might gain NCEA credits and work towards completing qualifications in information technology. Through programmes such as these, students become work-ready and are able to earn higher wages. Glen Bennett: Why are you looking to grow the tech sector workforce? Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: The digital tech sector significantly helps lift New Zealand's productivity and wealth. In 2021 alone, the sector contributed $7 billion towards New Zealand's GDP and, since 2016, has grown twice the rate of the wider economy. We want to make the tech sector accessible, especially for women and underrepresented groups such as Māori, Pacific peoples, those with disabilities, and also neurodiverse people. We know from looking at advanced economies like Germany, South Korea, Japan, and Singapore, the best investments you can make in the future of your economy are in science, technology, and skills and infrastructure. Glen Bennett: What feedback has the Minister seen on the digital skills package? Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: Heaps. NZTech chief executive, Graeme Muller says, "It's great to have some focused funding to address the skills shortage in the tech sector, particularly around new pathways and diversity, and the ITP provides a framework to help coordinate efforts across Government and industry." Stephen Knightly of RocketWerkz said, "It's great to see the Government taking tangible action to support not only interactive games but also the wider digital economy too." Health Informatics NZ board chair Karen Blake said she's "particularly excited to see funding for boosting women's participation" in the sector. Question No. 11—Land Information 11. Dr ELIZABETH KEREKERE (Independent) to the Minister for Land Information: Does he agree with the New Zealand Geographic Board Te Rautaki | Strategy 2020-2025 vision statement, "We continuously improve our capability and processes to achieve our goals and objectives"; if so, what changes, if any, have been made to improve processes for Māori participation? Hon ANDREW LITTLE (Acting Minister for Land Information): To the first part of the question, yes. In terms of the goals and objectives of the New Zealand Geographic Board Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa, this includes naming "features and places so that people can effectively communicate information about location and preserve New Zealand's heritage and culture". To the second part of the question, the board is bound by a statutory process which generally requires historical research, direct iwi engagement, and public notification. The board has made a number of improvements in recent years to their engagement with Māori to ensure that Māori are supported to participate in the work that the board does. This includes significant engagement with mana whenua on the development of new maps for Te Ika-a-Māui and Te Wai Pounamu to encourage the use of original Māori place names, establishing a fast-tracked process to work directly with mana whenua to have unofficial place names added to our maps and records, and agreeing an approach to encourage councils and iwi to submit alternative Māori place names for towns and cities. Dr Elizabeth Kerekere: What does the Minister say to kuia Aki Paipper and Margie McGuire from Operation Pātiki at Kohupātiki Marae, who struggled with the lengthy New Zealand Geographic Board application process to successfully restore Te Awa o Mokotūāraro as the rightful name of their river today? Hon ANDREW LITTLE: On behalf of the Minister: firstly, I would begin by congratulating Aki Paipper and Margie McGuire for their leadership in restoring the name of Te Awa o Mokotūāraro. The original proposal made by ngā kuia, which was to have the river named Ngaruroro Moko-tū-ā-raro ki Rangitira, was declined because that is the name of the original river before it was diverted for flood protection and before the river was split, and, therefore, also to avoid confusion with the adjacent Ngaruroro River. Members of the board personally met with Kohupātiki Marae on 26 July last year to break the news of that proposal being declined and to be there to acknowledge their disappointment, and to make the suggestion that they come back with a different name that they would be happy with. Following that, the proposal of the name Te Awa o Mokotūāraro was then proposed by Kohupātiki Marae instead and that name is official, and, indeed, it has been made official from today. The name Te Awa o Mokotūāraro acknowledges the stories and history of the river and is a step towards restoring its mauri, which was what prompted Kohupātiki Marae to propose a new name in the first place. The process—it is true—has been lengthy, but it has allowed for ample consultation and engagement with stakeholders to ensure that their whakaaro will respect it and the board will fulfil its statutory responsibilities. Dr Elizabeth Kerekere: How will the Minister ensure tangata whenua are fully supported to achieve the New Zealand Geographic Board's goal of restoring original Māori place names, and will he commit to simplifying the process to one led by tangata whenua? Hon ANDREW LITTLE: On behalf of the Minister, to the member: by definition, all the work that the board does involves engaging with Māori and upholding Te Tiriti o Waitangi—that's the statutory obligation that they have. Some things that the board has done are to establish a fast-tracked process to work directly with mana whenua to have unofficial place names recognised, and on some occasions when there is no objection and there are no alternative names, then that can be done in a way that doesn't have to be publicly notified. Secondly, it involves agreeing an approach to encourage councils and iwi to submit alternative Māori place names for towns and cities, and then, finally, developing new maps for Te Ika-a-Māui and Te Wai Pounamu to encourage the use of over 1,800 original Māori place names. Question No. 12—Police 12. Hon MARK MITCHELL (National—Whangaparāoa) to the Minister of Police: Does she stand by her statement, "It is my view that New Zealanders feel safer"; if so, why? Hon GINNY ANDERSEN (Minister of Police): The quote in the member's question is not my full statement and is a misrepresentation of my actual statement. Hon Michael Woodhouse: Point of order. Mr Speaker, that response is clearly out of order. She cannot say that a question itself that has been ruled in order is a misrepresentation. SPEAKER: Given my ruling earlier today, I agree. The Minister will stand, withdraw, and apologise. Hon Grant Robertson: Point of order, Mr Speaker. SPEAKER: New point of—I'll do the apology first. Stand, withdraw, and apologise. Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: Stand, withdraw, and apologise. Hon Grant Robertson: Point of order, Mr Speaker. The question contains a statement that is not the full statement that the member made, and, therefore, misrepresents the statement of the member. The fact that it has been accepted as a question does not change the fact that a partial statement misrepresents the statement of a member. If the question is to be allowed, the Minister responding should be allowed to state the fact that it is a misrepresentation. I think that if partial statements that change the meaning of a statement are allowed, then a Minister must have the right to be able to say that that misrepresents their view. Hon Gerry Brownlee: Well, Mr Speaker, can I just say that you have ruled today—and, I think, very appropriately—and I just suggest to Mr Robertson that people like him and me should not try dancing on the head of a pin, and particularly when you get the sort of result that you're seeing at the moment. It is quite clear that the Minister can respond—that might give clarity to why she said what she said. Hon Andrew Little: This is not a point of order. SPEAKER: This is a point of order, and it will be heard in silence. Hon Gerry Brownlee: Well, thank you "Mr Speaker Andrew Little". SPEAKER: I've made my ruling; I'm not changing it. The Minister can address the question and the context of it—as I said in my ruling earlier today. The breadth to which the Minister does that is entirely up to her, but he can't say what she says. Hon Mark Mitchell: Mr Speaker, shall I ask that question again, or— SPEAKER: No; I'm pretty sure she knows what it is. Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: I stand by my full statement in the context of that time: "It is my view that New Zealanders feel safer with a Government on track to deliver 1,800 extra police." As I noted yesterday, this Government has now delivered on its commitment to deliver 1,800 extra police. This Government has also passed new laws to tackle gangs by allowing additional warrants and search powers for gang conflict, introducing a five-year prison sentence for discharging a gun with intent to intimidate, and allowing greater ability for police and other agencies to seize cash. We've also committed to ongoing funding to keep the police ratio of one cop per 480 of the population. We've introduced an extended retail crime prevention programme and the fog cannon retail subsidy. We've introduced firearm prohibition orders to keep firearms out of the hands of those most dangerous New Zealanders who shouldn't have them. We've supported police to crack down on gangs and organised crime through Operation Cobalt, which has seen over 38,000 charges laid and nearly 400 firearms seized. We've introduced legislation to crack down on fleeing drivers, including the ability to seize and impound vehicles. We've announced a nationwide roll-out of the tactical response model to better support front-line police in dealing with dangerous and high-risk situations. We've established and delivered a firearms registry to set and begin on 24 June—that's this month. We've created programmes like Kotahi te Whakaaro and Circuit Breaker to disrupt cycles of reoffending. We've passed new laws to seize criminal assets and targeted associates of organised criminal groups and forfeit illegal funds in their KiwiSaver. We've also invested $94 million into tackling gangs and organised crime through Budget 2022. We've established Te Tari Pūreke—Firearms Safety Authority—as a dedicated business unit within police to improve gun safety in Aotearoa. I could go on, but I think I might save some more highlights for the next question. SPEAKER: Order! I'm on my feet. That answer was far too long. I didn't interrupt you—I was taking tally and deciding how many extra questions Mr Mitchell is going to get—two extra. Hon Mark Mitchell: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. When she says, "It is my view that New Zealanders feel safer.", who is she speaking for? Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: That is not my full statement. Hon Mark Mitchell: When she says, "It is my view that New Zealanders feel safer because we've delivered 1,800 extra police officers.", who is she speaking for? Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: For myself. That's why I said it is my view. Hon Mark Mitchell: So just for clarity for the House, when says that New Zealanders feel safer, she's just talking about herself? Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: When I said it is my view that New Zealanders feel safer now that we have 1,800 more police officers on the beat, I believe that New Zealanders are safer than they were under a National Government, when we had fewer police officers on the beat. Hon Mark Mitchell: Does she consider that she is gaslighting the public of New Zealand when she stands in this House and continues to tell the people of New Zealand that they should feel safer? SPEAKER: In so far as the Minister is responsible—you can address it if you like. You don't have to if you don't want to. Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: The only gaslighting going on in the House today is that member, who continually misrepresents my quote. Hon Michael Woodhouse: Point of order. Mr Speaker, we're now getting into some territory of the Minister openly defying not only the ruling you gave at the start of question time but the ruling you gave at the start of primary question No. 12. The second thing I would say is that if the Minister feels that she has been misrepresented, there are ways to deal with that, and this isn't that. Hon Grant Robertson: Speaking to the point of order. Mr Speaker, again, acknowledging the way in which you have chosen to run the House and that you have often said that it is up to members in the House to be able to behave responsibly within that framework, it will be obvious to absolutely everybody in the House that Mr Mitchell's last supplementary question was completely outside Standing Order 390, and he should expect the kind of response he got. SPEAKER: Yep—and expect no relief from the Speaker. So if you've got another question. Hon Mark Mitchell: When the Minister says that she's met with shopkeepers that have been subjected to ram raids and that they now feel safer, what's the number—how many has she met and how many have said that? Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: I have met with retailers in Auckland, I have met them in Wellington, and I've also met them in Christchurch. I'm happy to provide the member with a written account of each of those visits.