Tuesday, 1 August 2023 [Volume 769] The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m. KARAKIA/PRAYERS SPEAKER: Members, in celebration of Cook Islands Language Week, I've asked the Hon Poto Williams to say the prayer in te reo Māori Kuki Airani. Hon POTO WILLIAMS (Assistant Speaker—Labour): Te Atua Mana, te akameitaki atu nei matou iakoe no toou takinga meitaki taau i riringi mai ki runga ia matou. Te akaruke nei matou i to matou tu tangata, te akamaara nei matou i te Ariki, e te pure nei matou kia arataki koe i ta matou uriuri anga manako, kia rave matou i ta matou angaanga i roto i teia ngutuare na roto i te pakari, te tuatua tika e te akaaka no te meitaki e te au o to matou basileia Aotearoa. Amene. VISITORS Sri Lanka—Women Parliamentarians' Caucus, Delegation SPEAKER: I'm sure that members would wish to welcome the Hon Dr Sudarshini Fernandopulle, chairperson of the Women Parliamentarians' Caucus from the Parliament of Sri Lanka, and her accompanying delegation, who are present in the gallery. PRIVILEGE Conduct of Member—Tim van de Molen SPEAKER: Members, I have received a letter from Rachel Boyack raising a matter of privilege: Tim van de Molen's conduct towards the chairperson of the Transport and Infrastructure Committee on 29 June 2023. There are differing accounts of what occurred at the conclusion of the committee's meeting. If the allegations are accurate, the conduct complained of could amount to threatening or intimidating a member acting and the discharge of their duty, or threatening a member on account of their conduct in Parliament. The Speaker's role in such matters is to determine whether the facts alleged could, if true, amount to a breach of privilege or contempt of the House. The Speaker does not enquire into the veracity of the evidence presented, or conduct in inquiring into the allegation. That is the role of the Privileges Committee. I find that a question of privilege arises, and that question stands referred to the Privileges Committee. PETITIONS, PAPERS, SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS, AND INTRODUCTION OF BILLS SPEAKER: No petitions have been delivered to the Clerk for presentation. Ministers have delivered papers. CLERK: Government responses to: the petition of Mahi for Ukraine on "Declaring Russia a Terrorist State", and the report of the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee: Petition of Democracy for Myanmar Working Group New Zealand 2022 annual report for Te Pūkenga statements of intent for the: Electricity Authority New Zealand Infrastructure Commission New Zealand Police, and Rau Paenga Limited 2023/24 statements of performance expectations for the: Tertiary Education Commission Electricity Authority New Zealand Infrastructure Commission, and Rau Paenga Limited. SPEAKER: Those papers are published under the authority of the House. Select committee reports have been delivered for presentation. CLERK: Reports of the Economic Development, Science and Innovation Committee on the: 2021/22 Annual review of the Crown Regional Holdings Limited, and the 2021/22 Annual review of the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority report of the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee on the Petition of Morteza Sharifi and Petition of Aida Tavassoli report of the Petitions Committee on the Petition of Anthony Gore report of the Primary Production Committee on the Briefing on Muka Tangata's work plan report of the Regulations Review Committee on the Briefing on Animal Welfare Secondary Legislation reports of the Social Services and Community Committee on the: petition of the Retirement Village Residents Association, and the Resale Right for Visual Artists Bill report of the Transport and Infrastructure Committee on the Land Transport Management (Regulation of Public Transport) Amendment Bill. SPEAKER: The bills are set down for second reading. The reports of the Primary Production Committee and the Regulations Review Committee are set down for consideration. No bills have been introduced. ORAL QUESTIONS QUESTIONS TO MINISTERS Question No. 1—Finance 1. Hon JAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green) to the Minister of Finance: What unused revenue tools, if any, are available to the Government that would both increase allowances and enable better investment in public services? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): Kia orana, Mr Speaker. The answer to that hypothetical question is limited only by the member's imagination. However, I would note that the implementation of any such tool is limited by what is practical and affordable. Hon James Shaw: What is the effective tax rate paid by the wealthiest 1 percent of New Zealanders? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: If I recall the Inland Revenue research that was released earlier this year, it's about 8.9 percent. Hon James Shaw: And what is the effective tax rate paid by the average New Zealander? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I am enjoying quiz time. I believe it might be around about 20 percent. Hon James Shaw: And does he agree with the Prime Minister: "We don't have a great money tree in the backyard that means that we can continue to indefinitely increase Government spending, we have to pay for everything somehow.", and, if so, how much revenue did Treasury predict could be raised with a tax of 1.5 percent on net assets over $5 million? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: In answer to the first part of the question, despite extensive searching, no such money tree has been found, although looking at the transport policy produced by the National Party in the last few days, they appear to have found some magic money to the tune of about $10 billion. Hon James Shaw: How much revenue did Treasury predict could be raised with a wealth tax of 1.5 percent on net assets over $5 million? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Again, if I recall correctly—and enjoying the quiz that we're going through at the moment—not including the family home, I believe about $3.4 billion. Hon James Shaw: And what would the cost be of lifting the 45,000 children who are still currently below the material hardship line above that line, excluding household costs? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Well, I don't have that information with me. I'm very proud of the record that the Government has in terms of lifting children out of poverty—77,000 children, using the after - housing costs measure. There is always more to do when it comes to supporting our children to thrive. What we could not do and could not afford is tax cuts that aren't funded and would lead to cuts in the services that those children need. Question No. 2—Prime Minister 2. DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his Government's statements and policies? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Prime Minister): Yes, particularly the further $567 million we announced yesterday for immediate works on State highways in regions that are affected by the North Island weather events. That includes State highways in Tairāwhiti, Wairoa, Hawke's Bay, Coromandel, and Northland. The funding for these roads is coming from the $6 billion National Resilience Plan that the Government allocated funding for in this year's Budget. It'll go to replacing or strengthening and rebuilding damaged bridges and improving road surfaces on major stretches of roads. This, of course, comes on top of the $525 million already provided for roading infrastructure to get those regions back on their feet after Cyclone Gabrielle and the Auckland floods. David Seymour: Is the Prime Minister aware that Cyclone Gabrielle hit Hawke's Bay and Tairāwhiti in February, and how is it possibly his go-to boast policy that he has managed, after six months, to announce they're going to fund rebuilding the roads that were damaged? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I note the member clearly didn't listen to the entirety of the answer. We've already given them $525 million for the road rebuilding; that was done within weeks of the events happening. We're now adding another $567 million, because we don't think they should have to put up with Bailey bridges indefinitely. David Seymour: Does he stand by his statement that "we don't have a … money tree in the backyard that means we can continue to indefinitely increase government spending", and if that's the case, how does he explain the last six Budgets, where his Government has increased expenditure by 70 percent for no measurable outcome improvements? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Well, yes, I do stand by my comments, in the first part of that question, and I utterly reject the second. David Seymour: Can he, then, explain to New Zealanders in tangible, relatable terms, what actual outcomes have improved—not examples of where the Government spent more, but where the outcomes achieved have got better; 70 percent better? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: In fact, I could go on and on about it, but I'll give the member a few just to get him started. How about 77,000 fewer children living in poverty under this Government? How about an economy that's grown 6.7 percent under this Government? How about the 12,000 additional public homes that have been put in place under this Government, after the number of public homes went down under the last National-ACT Government? We could talk about the share of renewable electricity being the highest in a very long time—in fact, possibly for ever. We could talk about the fact that we've increased paid parental leave entitlements—that is thousands more Kiwi families enjoying extra paid parental leave. And if the member thinks that that's not leading to better outcomes for those babies, then perhaps he needs to think again about how he measures the value of things. David Seymour: Does the Prime Minister understand that he just explained the economy grew at a smidgen over 1 percent a year and he built 2,000 houses a year for six years in return for a 70 percent increase in public expenditure—is that what this Government calls success, and is that what they're taking into the election? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Of course, the population has grown and incomes have grown during that time as well. David Seymour: Is the Prime Minister now claiming that the population has grown because Government expenditure's increased, or is he really saying that he'd like to hide from the fact that after inflation and after population growth, the amount spent in real terms per capita is up 28 percent and he's got nothing tangible to show for it? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: No. David Seymour: Does he stand by his various statements praising police, and will they receive a 14.5 percent increase in pay this year? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: In answer the first part of the question, I believe the police do an exceptional job on behalf of New Zealanders. In answer to the second part of the question, I don't intend to get into bargaining in question time—no Prime Minister or Minister would ever do that. David Seymour: What does it say for this Government's economic management that they have borrowed an additional $121 billion over the last six Budgets and are now struggling to meet the arbitration recommended offer to pay teachers more? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: With regard to arbitration, of course, the teachers would not be asking for such big pay increases had they had pay increases during the time of the nine years that the National Party was in Government, when their salaries actually went backwards in real terms. But in terms of the Government's overall level of borrowing, I would note that one of the big contributors to that was supporting New Zealanders through a once-in-a-generation economic shock caused by a global pandemic, and during that time the members opposite, including the member himself, were arguing we should've been spending more. David Seymour: Does the Prime Minister also want to take the credit for spending $100,000 a day to store $531 million—that's over half a billion bucks—of expired rapid antigen tests (RATs) after the Government, for months and months, in fact over a year, banned anyone else from importing them? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Well, the member can't seem to get his story straight. He keeps complaining that we didn't have enough RAT tests; now he's complaining we've got too many of them. Question No. 3—Cyclone Recovery SPEAKER: Question No. 3, Tāmati Coffey. TĀMATI COFFEY (Labour): Thank you, Mr Speaker. [Interruption] My question—[Interruption] SPEAKER: Order! I'd like to hear this question. 3. TĀMATI COFFEY (Labour) to the Minister for Cyclone Recovery: What recent announcements has he made on support for cyclone-affected regions? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister for Cyclone Recovery): The Government is providing a further $567 million to Waka Kotahi for immediate works on State highways in Tairāwhiti, Wairoa, Hawke's Bay, Coromandel, and Northland. The funding will come from the $6 billion national resilience plan announced in Budget 2023 to support the building of infrastructure that is more resilient to the impacts of climate change. As I've said previously, the immediate focus is on building back better from the North Island weather events. Over time, the plan will address the severe infrastructure deficits that have been holding New Zealand back. I would also note that the investment announced yesterday is on top of the $525 million already provided to Waka Kotahi in the immediate aftermath of the cyclone. Connecting our community is critical to getting our regions back on their feet and that is why we are supporting it. Tāmati Coffey: What else did the announcement say about building resilience in the transport infrastructure in cyclone-affected regions? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: This extra funding will be used to replace or strengthen or rebuild damaged bridges and roads in affected regions. It will also improve the road surface on major stretches of roads where potholes and cracks left after the weather events have made travel slow and frustrating for locals. Some specific examples include on State Highway 35 rebuilding the Hikuwai Bridge, repairs and rebuilding of bridges on State Highway 2 north of Napier, and the State Highway 1 Brynderwyn to Dome Valley section. In addition to this funding for State highways, the Government has already made a significant contribution to local road repairs in the regions which are normally the responsibility of local government. This amounts to around $210 million since February this year. Tāmati Coffey: What other announcements has the Government made to support the regions affected by the cyclone? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: The Government has negotiated a cost-sharing package with Hawke's Bay mayors and the regional council chair. This includes the cost of buying out high-risk residential properties in the region on a cost-sharing basis. The mayors have agreed to take the package to their councils and they will meet to discuss it this week. The priority areas of the overall package will be addressing category 3 property buy-outs, flood protection, and urgent roading and bridge repairs. As I've said previously, we are moving as quickly as we can in supporting councils with their locally led recovery. The agreements that we've reached with the region's leaders will give the people of Hawke's Bay certainty. Councils are now being asked to look at the package, ratify it, and consult with their communities as appropriate. Tāmati Coffey: What work is the Government doing with other councils affected by the recent weather events? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Negotiations with Auckland and Tairāwhiti on cost-sharing arrangements are progressing well and we're hopeful that agreements can be reached in these regions shortly. Alongside these negotiations, the Crown is working through a process and support package for whenua Māori and communities affected in the regions that have a large amount of Māori land. Funding for this work sits outside the cost of the cost-sharing arrangements with councils. We are committed to working together with all affected communities, iwi, and councils to find solutions for recovery and rebuild. As I've said previously, we cannot meet all the costs, particularly as we know that there will be more extreme weather events like this. We are striking a balance between supporting affected communities without taxpayers having to bear all of the cost of that. Simeon Brown: Is he satisfied with the political impartiality of all his cyclone recovery taskforce members? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Yes, I am, and— Hon Members: Ha, ha! Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Yes, I am. The cyclone recovery taskforce is doing an excellent job of making sure— Chris Bishop: Oh yeah—yeah, yeah, yeah. Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Well, I'm interested, you know, that the members opposite want to impugn the integrity of people who have put their hands up including, I might say, one of their former colleagues. Question No. 4—Prime Minister 4. CHRISTOPHER LUXON (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all of his Government's statements and actions? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Prime Minister): Yes, particularly our commitment to ensuring that New Zealanders in need have access to public housing. One in seven of the total public housing stock has been added by this Government. Year on year, we're delivering the most public homes of any Government since the Nash Government in the 1950s, which is a stark contrast to what we inherited when we became the Government. Christopher Luxon: Was former transport Minister Michael Wood right or wrong when he said the $30 billion Auckland light rail project was "a necessary investment", and why after six years can't the Prime Minister commit to a route or any other details? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Work is under way on planning for a route, including identifying the preferred route for Auckland light rail and including identifying the most desirable construction method, whether it should go over the ground or under the ground, and we're awaiting the results of that business case process. I would note, for example, that some of the roading projects that National promised in its transport package that it announced yesterday, they'd also promised back in 2008, and in nine years in Government didn't deliver them. Christopher Luxon: Why after six years of Let's Get Wellington Moving failing to deliver a single transport project, is he still not even sure if it's going ahead or not? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I reject the member's characterisation of my comments. Christopher Luxon: Was Carmel Sepuloni right or wrong when she said about crime in Auckland, "I wouldn't say it's that bad at all"? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The member should stick to full quotes, rather than partial pieces of them. If he wants us to start partially quoting him, we're going to have a lot of fun with that. Christopher Luxon: Was police Minister Ginny Andersen right or wrong when she said New Zealanders feel safer, when violent crime is up 33 percent and there are two ram raids in New Zealand every day? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The member is deliberately taking the member's quote out of context. Christopher Luxon: Was Grant Robertson right or wrong when he said that taking GST off food would mostly benefit supermarkets? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: That's a question that you might want to ask him. Nicola Willis: Under the bus—under the bus again. SPEAKER: Oh, quiet! I want to hear this question. Christopher Luxon: Was Grant Robertson's Tax Working Group right or wrong when it said that removing GST from food and drink would benefit higher-income households more than lower-income households? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I have no problems with what the Tax Working Group concluded. The report's publicly available. Everyone can make their own judgments on that. Christopher Luxon: Why is it that whether it's tax or transport or, frankly, any other issue, he can tell the country what he won't do, but he can't tell the country what he will do? Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I completely reject that. If the member paid attention during the Budget, for example, he will see a range of new initiatives in the Budget, including removing the $5 prescription co-payments, something the National Party said they'll take away; adding 20 hours free early childhood education to two-year-olds, something the National Party has said they'll take away; making public transport free for the young children, and half-price for under-25s, something the National Party won't commit to; providing healthy homes or insulation for 100,000 more homes, something the National Party don't seem to know what they're going to do. On this side of the House, we do focus, however, on making sure that the announcements that we make actually have money behind them—something the National Party still don't seem to be able to do. I would note that in July 2017, the Labour Party released a comprehensive fiscal plan ahead of the general election, and yet it's now August; nothing but crickets from the National Party. Question No. 5—Housing 5. PAUL EAGLE (Labour—Rongotai) to the Minister of Housing: What progress has the Government made in rebuilding public housing in New Zealand? Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Minister of Housing): I'm pleased to report that the Government has added more than 13,000 new public homes since October 2017. Of the 13,305 homes, 11,285 of these are new builds. In June 2023 alone, 1,107 public homes were added to the national stock. This is the highest monthly delivery of public homes by Kāinga Ora ever. To put our public house building programme in perspective, one in seven homes has been added by this Government in the last five years. I am proud to be part of a Government that is delivering the biggest public housing build programme per year since the 1950s. Paul Eagle: How has delivery improved in the regions? Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Yesterday, I had the pleasure of being in Masterton to welcome the return of new Government-owned public homes in the area for the first time in two decades. Along with the 21 Masterton homes and two new homes in Dannevirke, the developments represent the first step in a commitment to delivering a larger pipeline of housing projects in the region, with at least 80 new homes in the construction, planning, or feasibility stages. This Government has added almost 300 public homes across Northland since October 2017. This stands in stark contrast to the National Party, who, in the nine years in Government, reduced the number of public homes in Northland by 93. In Kerikeri, a community housing provider's build-to-own development for 10 public housing places was completed in March this year. The homes' and the area's high demand are managed by Habitat for Humanity Northland Region. SPEAKER: Number one. First of all, that answer was far too long. It's been a long time in this House that using a supplementary question from the Government to the Government to attack the Opposition is out of order. I will give the Opposition spokesperson two questions, if he wishes to use them. Chris Bishop: Can she confirm that after six years, the Government's housing record stands at rents up $170 per week, a quadrupling in the State house waiting list, thousands of families living in motels, and hundreds living in cars? Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: What I can confirm is this is a Government that has admitted there is a housing crisis and has a plan to address it. That does stand in stark contrast to nine years under a previous National Government; that even when you accounted for the transfer of community housing providers (CHPs), they ended up with 1,500 fewer public houses than they started with. Not only did they flog off our houses, but they also failed to build them. We would have over 20,000 more public houses in New Zealand today if we didn't have a National Government between 2008 and 2017 who had a dereliction of duty when it came to housing; that would account to 85 percent of the waiting list. Chris Bishop: How many of the promised 100,000 KiwiBuild houses have been built? Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: As the member well knows, there has been a recess of KiwiBuild; but what I can tell that member is vastly more than the less than 100 affordable homes that the previous National Government managed under their housing areas when they were in Government. It's time for the National Party to start putting up some policies that are actually going to address a housing crisis, because we have not seen any. Paul Eagle: How is the Government working with community housing providers in its public housing programme? Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: The Government is committed to partnering with community housing providers to deliver our public house build programme. We are seeing growth in the CHP sector, with the number of registered CHPs growing from 43 when we came into office to 74 providers today. Since October 2017, CHPs have supported the delivery of 7,444 homes—1,944 of these being new builds. We also have changed the funding settings for CHPs to support them to deliver new houses and focus on increasing supply in the regions through changes to the Operating Supplement cap and the introduction of early-stage operational funding. Paul Eagle: What more does the Government have planned for public housing? Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: In Budget 2023, the Government announced an additional 3,000 public homes by June 2025. These additional homes build on the 18,000 homes we have committed to delivering by 2024. The updated public housing plan through to 2025 will have a focus on regional delivery as well as maintaining momentum of the current pipeline. At my request, officials are developing bottom-up delivery plans, working with community housing providers, stress testing the supply pipeline, and analysing existing demand data. Details of the plan will be released by early September. Question No. 6—Finance 6. NICOLA WILLIS (Deputy Leader—National) to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by all of his statements and actions on tax policy? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): Yes, in the context that they were made and undertaken. Nicola Willis: Does he stand by his statement made earlier this year that taking GST off food would mostly benefit supermarkets? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I stand by the statements I made in the context in which they were made. Nicola Willis: Does he stand by his statement in relation to exempting food from GST: "other countries with more exemptions will know it becomes an absolute boondoggle to get through.", and what exactly did he mean by "boondoggle"? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I'm very pleased that the word "boondoggle" is getting a run in Parliament—one of my favourite phrases. I do, obviously, stand—as I said—by the statements in the context in which they were made. I'd also note for the member, there are a few things that have been called boondoggles over the years that turned out all right. The Sydney Opera House was one of those, and the Hubble Space Telescope. Nicola Willis: Was he correct when he identified definitional concerns about the removal of GST from fresh fruit or vegetables: "you get into an argument about what's the difference between beetroot and canned beetroot, and if you want to make a real impact on the lowest income people you wouldn't cut the tax off fresh beetroot"? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Again, as a former fruit and vege worker in a supermarket, discussion about beetroot is one that I am particularly pleased to have here. My father used to put beetroot on scones, which is not something I would support New Zealanders doing. I stand by the answers I have already given. Nicola Willis: Was former revenue Minister David Parker correct to agree—in a report from 2013—that removing GST from fruit and vegetables would have "opened exploitable and confusing loopholes, and dirtied an otherwise clean tax"? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: In this House, I am responsible for my own statements. I stand by the statements I have made in the context that they have been made. What I do think is incredibly important about taxation policy is that you show how you can pay for it. If you can't show how you can pay for it, as the member can't, that means cuts to public services. That's what is important in tax policy, and we do not have a funded tax policy from the National Party. Nicola Willis: Would he support a tax policy to remove GST from fruit and vegetables? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As I've said many times in this House, the Government has completed its tax work programme. Question No. 7—Education 7. CAMILLA BELICH (Labour) to the Minister of Education: What progress has the Government made in improving school buildings and property since 2017? Hon JAN TINETTI (Minister of Education): This Government has made huge progress on improving school property and buildings since 2017. We know that having warm, dry, and fit-for-purpose classrooms is vital for the educational outcomes of our kids. Since 2017, 98 percent of schools have received funding for property upgrades through the School Investment Package, 5YA, Ngā iti Kahurangi, and the National School Redevelopment Programme. Of the 14,686 projects which have been undertaken across these programmes since 2017, 50 percent are complete. Camilla Belich: How has the school improvement package benefited schools? Hon JAN TINETTI: The school improvement package was introduced to give schools the opportunity to bring forward their discretionary projects and enhance their facilities for students. Of the 2,054 schools with school improvement package funding—or SIP projects—more than 90 percent of schools have had at least one SIP project completed. Camilla Belich: How is the Government supporting schools with buildings and property affected by the North Island weather events? Hon JAN TINETTI: Following the devastating weather events earlier this year, the Government provided immediate funding for the repairs to over 500 damaged schools. We have also committed to return all schools impacted by the Auckland flooding and Cyclone Gabrielle to their pre - weather event state through the cyclone recovery package. We know that this has been an incredibly unsettling time for our young people, and this will ensure our schools and communities have some certainty over their futures. Camilla Belich: How does this support wider investment in education? Hon JAN TINETTI: Having fit-for-purpose classrooms is an important foundation for education. We are also providing healthy school lunches, free period products, and supporting school attendance. We are taking action to improve the Curriculum and ensuring that NCEA is providing students with the skills they need for a successful life and, as I always say, a life full of choices. Nicola Grigg: Given those answers, can she explain why, despite a 2019 announcement from the then education Minister, Chris Hipkins, that Ellesmere College in Leeston would have a $30 million rebuild to be completed next year, that school has now been advised that this project has been pushed out to 2028 due to a "significant shortfall of funds"? Hon JAN TINETTI: The member made an assertion at the beginning of that statement that had nothing to do with the Ellesmere College projects. David Seymour: How long does it usually take the Minister to reply to correspondence from her office, and when can my constituents at Victoria Avenue School expect a reply from this Minister in relation to my letter to her about the parlous state of their buildings, which are leaking, sliding down a hill, and flooded due to varying issues that they face? When can they get a reply, Minister? Hon JAN TINETTI: If the member actually contacts my office, we'll be happy to give him a time for that reply. Rawiri Waititi: Given that capital works project funding was granted in 2018 for Ōpōtiki College, which is a decile 2D school, which was also at the same time that Tauranga Boys' College, a decile 6 then, and Lynmore Primary School, decile 9, were also granted funding under the same scheme—both Tauranga Boys' College and Lynmore Primary School have had their projects completed since funding was granted in 2018, but Ōpōtiki has not had any projects completed under this funding grant. Why has the Ministry of Education and you, as the Minister, not prioritised the completion of upgrades and rebuilds for Ōpōtiki College? Hon JAN TINETTI: Ōpōtiki College has actually got quite a number of complex issues that are within it, and we are working through that, but if the member would like to have that conversation with me—I know the member wants to meet with me after question time—I'm really happy to have that conversation, and let's find a way forward. David Seymour: Point of order. I seek leave to table emails and records showing that I've followed up with the Minister's office not once, not twice, but three times over the last two months, trying to get her to respond. SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There appears to be none. They may be tabled. Hon Michael Woodhouse: Point of order. In the supplementary question that Nicola Grigg asked the Minister, the Minister's reply was that the question contained an assertion that was incorrect. Would it be appropriate for the Minister to point to the assertion that was incorrect—not explain why it wasn't, but which part of the question she disputed? SPEAKER: To be frank, I'm not sure. What I will do, as we're still on the same question, is I'm going to give her an extra supplementary, and the member can use it and I'll listen a lot more carefully to it. Nicola Grigg: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Can she explain why, despite the 2019 announcement from the then education Minister, Chris Hipkins, that Ellesmere College in Leeston would have a $30 million rebuild to be completed next year, the school has now been advised that this project has been pushed out to 2028 due to "significant shortfall of funds"? Hon JAN TINETTI: Ellesmere College is sitting on some land that is unstable. That was unknown about at the time— Hon Gerry Brownlee: No, it's not. That's complete rubbish. Hon JAN TINETTI: Having said that, this is my understanding of what I have been told. Therefore, the costs have ballooned. If the member would like to put that in writing, a more fulsome answer can come to her. Question No. 8—Education 8. ERICA STANFORD (National—East Coast Bays) to the Minister of Education: Does she stand by all her statements and actions? Hon JAN TINETTI (Minister of Education): Yes, in the context they were given and taken. Erica Stanford: How can she stand by her actions when they have resulted in a 10.3 percent decline in the number of Māori student leavers with NCEA level 2 under her watch, comparing 2022 to 2017? Hon JAN TINETTI: Students sitting NCEA last year faced turbulent and disrupted teaching over the last few years. Globally, we are seeing the impacts of COVID on student achievement. New Zealand's results are in line with international trends. I would note, though, that after five years in Government, the National Party saw results in line with what we saw in 2022 after Labour's five years in Government, which also saw students navigate through a global pandemic. Erica Stanford: Does she agree with the Ministry of Education, who said, "Between 2017 and 2022, the proportion of Māori school leavers with NCEA level 2 or above decreased by 10.3 percentage points. Year-on-year increases occurred between 2012 and 2017, but since then, there have been year-on-year decreases."? Hon JAN TINETTI: What I can say is that we are seeing a number of young people who are leaving for other opportunities such as employment, apprenticeships, or travelling overseas. All of these have increased. We are seeing a record number of apprenticeships, and I would also point out that leaving school is not the end of a person's academic opportunity. A large proportion of young people, including our Māori leavers, are leaving school before 17 to further their education. Erica Stanford: What would she say to Māori parents when, under her Government, only 58 percent of their tamariki are leaving school with NCEA level 2, which the OECD says is the minimum qualification young people need for successful labour market participation? Hon JAN TINETTI: They might be leaving school with that, but, as I've already pointed out, we have a record number that are going into apprenticeships. We're already pointing out that we have these young people who are continuing their education in other ways. They're also leaving school to go into work because we've got high employment levels or we've got record numbers that are leaving to go overseas. Erica Stanford: Is the Minister saying that she's accepting of the fact that only 58 percent of Māori students are leaving with NCEA level 2 because they're going into work and they're going overseas, when the OECD says very clearly that the minimum qualification needed in New Zealand is level 2 for successful labour market participation? Hon JAN TINETTI: What I am going to say is that we want to ensure that when kids are leaving school that they have the knowledge that they need to thrive. We are making certain that the qualification process has minimum literacy and mathematic qualifications, which has never been done before. We are making certain that from next year, we are bringing in a new mandatory assessment from year 10 to give students, parents, and employers the confidence that school leavers have foundational maths and literacy skills, which is something that that side failed to do. Question No. 9—Finance 9. DAMIEN SMITH (ACT) to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement that "GST is a comprehensive tax which makes it very easy to administer and people in the room who've been in other countries with more exemptions will know it becomes an absolute [boondiggle] to get through", and does he support expanding exemptions to GST in New Zealand? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): I do stand by that statement in the context it was made, and with the word "boondoggle". In answer to the second part of the question— Erica Stanford: "To-ma-to", "to-mate-oes". Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: —the Government's tax policy—well, that's the thing, isn't it? The Government's tax policy for this term has been set out clearly, and we're not making any changes of that sort. Damien Smith: Does the Minister agree with the findings of the GST background paper produced by the tax working group in 2018 that exempting items such as food and drink is purely targeted towards achieving distributional goals and has a disproportionately large revenue impact, and does he support expanding exemptions to GST in New Zealand? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As I just said in my answer to the primary question, the Government's tax policy for this term has been set out clearly and we are not making any changes of that sort. Damien Smith: Would the Minister agree that a boondoggle is a project that is considered a waste of both time and money, yet it is often continued due to extraneous political motivations, and does the Minister agree that providing tax exemptions on goods sold by supermarkets whilst simultaneously seeking to address the high excess profits of those supermarkets would be counterintuitive? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: In answer to the first part of the question, I've already mentioned a couple of projects that have been called boondoggles that have been successful. Another one, for the member's edification, was the attempt to land people on the moon, which was called a "moondoggle", and it actually turned out all right in the end. Damien Smith: Does the Minister acknowledge the various court cases which have occurred in countries which do have different rates of GST on different food items—including whether smoothies should be counted as liquefied fruit salads, and if juice cleanses can be considered meal replacements in the UK—and does he think that determining which tax rate applies to individual food items would be a good use of funds in New Zealand? Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As I've said twice now and in my primary answer, the Government's tax policy for this term has been set out clearly and we are not making any changes of that sort. Question No. 10—Immigration 10. LEMAUGA LYDIA SOSENE (Labour) to the Minister of Immigration: What reports has he seen on the reopening of our borders? Hon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister of Immigration): Monday—which is yesterday—marked one year since our border fully reopened following the restrictions imposed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Since then, we have seen demand to visit New Zealand far outstrip initial expectations, showing that our Reconnecting New Zealand strategy has been a huge success. Since the full reopening on 31 July 2022, we've approved over 2.1 million people to visit, study, or work in New Zealand. This includes over 1.7 million visitors, over 48,000 international students, more than 75,000 accredited employer work visas being issued, and over 60,000 working holiday visas being issued. This is a real vote of confidence in New Zealand as an attractive destination for workers, students, and tourists, and shows that despite international economic headwinds and higher costs associated with travel post-pandemic, we can be proud of our reopening to the world. In this respect, I acknowledge the work of my predecessors the Hon Michael Wood and the Hon Kris Faafoi. Lemauga Lydia Sosene: How do these figures compare to visitor numbers before the pandemic? Hon ANDREW LITTLE: Figures from Stats New Zealand show that net migration figures have rebounded to the sorts of volumes we were seeing prior to the pandemic. In addition to this, Immigration New Zealand has just recorded its busiest June ever of incoming visitor visa application volumes, with more than 46,000 visitor visa applications approved. This follows the busiest ever May experienced. The Government is, of course, monitoring volumes to ensure that our small country and labour market can fully absorb those who wish to come here, and deal with community pressures effectively. Lemauga Lydia Sosene: How are we ensuring that we are getting the workers we need into the country? Hon ANDREW LITTLE: These strong migration figures reflect in part the responsiveness we built into the work visa system. The job check process ensures that accredited employer work visas are only able to be granted if a New Zealander is not able to be found to do a given job. Obviously, during a period of near record low unemployment, this will be an easier threshold to meet. However, when unemployment picks up, we would expect these numbers to drop as more New Zealanders become available for work. These changes have been made in part to ensure we are attracting the highly skilled people we need, and the OECD has recognised our success in this area by naming us the most attractive country in the world for skilled migrants. Lemauga Lydia Sosene: Does Immigration New Zealand have the processing capacity to keep up with strong interest in visiting and working in New Zealand? Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I am confident that they do. After a tricky initial period with a new IT system and demand for visas massively outstripping expectations, visa processing figures have now settled, and for the vast majority of applicants I am confident they will receive a timely decision. The Government will continue to monitor visa processing figures closely to ensure that these high standards are maintained. Question No. 11—Transport 11. SIMEON BROWN (National—Pakuranga) to the Minister of Transport: Will he commit to continuing and delivering Let's Get Wellington Moving and Auckland light rail? Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister of Transport): Wellington deserves a comprehensive transport network that moves people across the city. As the Prime Minister has said, the problem with Let's Get Wellington Moving is that it hasn't been moving fast enough. We're not dumping the programme, but we are in discussions with Wellington City and regional councils as to how the programme can be progressed faster. Regarding Auckland light rail, as I told the member last week, work is ongoing. Final investment decisions on Auckland light rail are yet to be taken, and I'm not expecting them until after the election. We will be saying more regarding our transport priorities for Auckland, Wellington, and the rest of the country in the coming weeks. When we do announce our priorities, they will be properly costed and properly funded. Simeon Brown: Can the Minister express confidence in Let's Get Wellington Moving, and, if not, why not? Hon DAVID PARKER: Yes, but it does need to speed up. Simeon Brown: After six years in office, what does the Minister mean by "speed up"? Hon DAVID PARKER: I would say adding to the progress that we've made across the country. You know, we've invested $16 billion in transport initiatives, both on the public transport and the roading front. We've also invested heavily in rail. We've finished off projects that were started by the last Government but not properly funded. We funded billion-dollar cost overruns for the likes of the City Rail Link in Auckland. We funded shortfalls of underfunding on Transmission Gully. We've cleaned up so many messes from the prior Government. We're determined to show the public of New Zealand that if people are going to make rash promises as to their future roading programme, they should show how they're going to fund them. Simon Court: Would the Minister ask users of the current State Highway 1 and Wellington residents if they'd be prepared to pay a toll to get a tunnel built through Mount Victoria quicker than Let's Get Wellington Moving could, and would the Minister welcome private sector financing to fund toll roads, as set out in ACT's policy to supercharge toll road delivery? Hon DAVID PARKER: In respect of whether roads are built by the private sector through public-private partnerships or funded directly by the public sector, irrespective of which of those two choices is taken, you still have to fund the full cost of the project, and the problem with some of the announcements that we've heard this week is that they're billions of dollars out. In respect of propositions to toll, I find some propositions hard to fathom given that we proposed the tolling of Penlink but the National Party says that they're going to not do that. Simeon Brown: How many metres of Auckland light rail track have been delivered so far as part of the Government's $29.2 billion light rail plan, which was promised to be delivered by 2021? Hon DAVID PARKER: As I said, final investment decisions have not been taken on that project, and therefore no money's been spent on the laying of tracks yet. Simeon Brown: Does he stand by the Prime Minister's statement in question time just a few moments ago where he said, "Work is under way on planning for a route, including identifying the preferred route for Auckland light rail … including identifying the most desirable construction method", and how many more years are required to plan for this route? Hon DAVID PARKER: Yes, I do, and one of the examples of why that's necessary is that the geology of the area differs. Some parts you could tunnel through and you would encounter lava throws that would put up the cost of the project probably by more than the cost overruns that we've seen for the City Rail Link. We're determined to avoid those sorts of cost overruns by proper planning and investigation in the first place. Question No. 12—Tourism 12. GLEN BENNETT (Labour—New Plymouth) to the Minister of Tourism: Kia orana, Mr Speaker. What recent reports has he seen regarding New Zealanders' support for tourism? Hon PEENI HENARE (Minister of Tourism): Kia orana, Mr Speaker. Last week I received research conducted by Tourism New Zealand showing that 89 percent of New Zealanders agree that tourism is good for New Zealand. This number shows that Kiwis understand the fundamental role that tourism plays in our country. And this Government has been clear in providing support to our regions, boosting our economy, and ensuring tourism is a key part of our national identity. Hon David Bennett: What are New Zealanders' views on how tourism impacts the economy? Hon PEENI HENARE: 92 percent of New Zealanders agree that tourism has a positive impact on the economy, and they're right. International visitor spend in May 2023 was up 14 percent from pre-COVID May 2019 levels, and spend from all international visitors totalled $3.2 billion in the March 2023 quarter. It's fantastic to see that New Zealanders recognise tourism's positive contribution to our economy as the sector rebuilds from the impacts of COVID-19 and supports New Zealand's recovery. That's why the Government has been hard at work developing international ties to continue to bring overseas tourists into New Zealand. We've already announced new flight paths between China and New Zealand, and we've also announced new technology partnerships that will enable New Zealand to be promoted as a travel destination to a significant consumer base. Glen Bennett: What are New Zealanders' views on how tourism impacts regional communities? Hon PEENI HENARE: Fewer New Zealanders now perceive the level of tourism in their community as being too high compared to November 2022, and there is still a high 37 percent of New Zealanders who would like to see more tourism in their communities. Communities recognise that tourism provides jobs and also that it can positively affect social wellbeing in connection with culture. Tourism New Zealand is working hard to attract visitors who want to experience New Zealand in an authentic way that contributes positively to New Zealand's culture, society, nature, and economy. We continue to support destination planning at a regional level with a recent investment of $5 million to help develop a well-managed, sustainable visitor destination that can adapt and change depending on the region's needs or opportunities from a social, economic, cultural, and environmental point of view. Glen Bennett: How is the Government addressing some of the concerns expressed by New Zealanders regarding tourism here in New Zealand? Hon PEENI HENARE: Some New Zealanders believe there are negative impacts from tourism, mainly around specific things that affect them in their region, but also the environment. This Government is listening; there's considerable work at central and local government levels to ensure that the tourism sector contributes both positively and innovatively to all communities. This includes the Tourism Environment Action Plan, which is looking at ways that tourism in Aotearoa New Zealand can protect and restore the climate and environment, making sure tourism is regenerative into our future. HOUSE IN COMMITTEE SPEAKER: I declare the House in committee for the Appropriation (2023/24 Estimates) Bill, the Natural and Built Environment Bill, and the Spatial Planning Bill.