Parliamentary Debates

Transcription

1 First Session, Fiftieth Parliament, Parliamentary Debates (HANSARD) FINAL DAILY Tuesday, 11 September 2012 (for inclusion in Volume 683) WELLINGTON, NEW ZEALAND Published under the authority of the House of Representatives 2012

2

3 TUESDAY, 11 SEPTEMBER 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS MOTIONS 2012 Paralympic Games Success of New Zealand Team QUESTIONS FOR ORAL ANSWER Questions to Ministers Economies, International Effect on New Zealand Exchange Rate Commentary and Potential Consequences of Devaluation Schools Supplying Food to Students Tertiary Institutions 2011 Performance Child Poverty Financial Support Welfare Reforms Outstanding Arrest Warrants and Requirements for Parents Environment Canterbury Postponement of Elections Threatened Species, Protection Increase to Penalties for Smuggling Unemployment Projected Rates and Industrial Sector Jobs Census 2013 Preparations Environment Canterbury Postponement of Elections Schools, Attendance Costs Donations URGENT DEBATES State-owned Energy Companies, Sales Delay of Mighty River Power Sale URGENT DEBATES DECLINED Environment Canterbury Regional Council Elections URGENT DEBATES State-owned Energy Companies, Sales Delay of Mighty River Power Sale SUBORDINATE LEGISLATION (CONFIRMATION AND VALIDATION) BILL First Reading MARINE LEGISLATION BILL First Reading LAND TRANSPORT MANAGEMENT AMENDMENT BILL First Reading

4

5 11 Sep 2012 Motions 5031 TUESDAY, 11 SEPTEMBER 2012 Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m. Prayers. MOTIONS 2012 Paralympic Games Success of New Zealand Team Hon MURRAY McCULLY (Minister for Sport and Recreation): I seek leave to move a motion without notice congratulating the Paralympic team on its performance at the recent Paralympic Games. Mr SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none. Hon MURRAY McCULLY: I move, That this House congratulate the members of the 2012 New Zealand Paralympic team on their outstanding performance, achieving six gold, seven silver, and four bronze medals and finishing ranked 21 st in the world. The 2012 New Zealand Paralympic campaign can be judged a real success, and on behalf of the Government I want to acknowledge all of the athletes who were members of the team and congratulate them collectively on their achievement. I want to mention in particular Sophie Pascoe, who added significantly to her previous successes on the international stage, collecting three gold and three silver medals, and setting two new world records and one new Paralympic record. We saw outstanding performances from a number of other athletes who were part of the New Zealand team. The achievement of 17 medals is all the more admirable when you note that there were only 24 in the team. On top of that, New Zealand has come out as the leading nation per capita, up on third at the Beijing Paralympics. The 2012 Paralympics broke a number of records, with 2.7 million spectators filling the various venues and more than $70 million raised in ticket sales. Both of these are unprecedented figures. Two hundred and fifty-one world records were broken over 11 days. For our people to have succeeded in an environment this challenging is a very significant achievement indeed. I am therefore pleased to offer on behalf of the Government our congratulations to all of the members of the 2012 Paralympic team as well as their coaches, support staff, and families, who played such an important part in their performance. DAVID SHEARER (Leader of the Opposition): I also would like to join in congratulating our Paralympic team. It was a great moment to able to stand here and say that today New Zealand is on top of the world, and that means that our medal total per capita was actually the best in the world, which is a remarkable achievement. The incredible performance of our paralympians in London has been something that has made us very, very proud. When our team comes home tomorrow it will bring with it 17 medals: six gold, seven silver, and four bronze. That is an absolute triumph, and it is a significant improvement on the Beijing Paralympics, when New Zealand was ranked third for medals per capita. This achievement reflects the hard work, the dedication, and the commitment of the Kiwi contingent. I would like to pay tribute to the efforts of the entire team of 24 athletes, from 13- year-old Nikita Howarth, who made her debut in swimming, to Jan Apel, who also made her Paralympics debut, in sailing at the age of 61, which is an enormous inspiration to us all. Our athletes performed brilliantly across all of the events swimming, cycling, rowing, athletics, equestrian, sailing, and shooting and I would particularly like to mention the achievements of Christchurch swimming sensation Sophie Pascoe, who won a medal in every event that she entered. It was a proud

6 5032 Motions 11 Sep 2012 moment to see Sophie carry the flag into the stadium for the closing ceremony. She absolutely deserved the honour. Our team overall did us proud. I was lucky enough to meet swimmer Mary Fisher at the Upper Hutt cossie club just before she left for the games, and I was struck by her commitment and the amount of hard work that she had put in to get where she was. She went on to win four medals, including a gold. One disappointment for me, however, and, I am sure, for many other New Zealanders, was that we were not able to see many of these achievements of all our team live on television, as people did in other countries. We had to rely on delayed coverage or an international feed that did not focus on our Kiwi team. That is a shame, and I hope it is different for the next Paralympics. To be able to see our athletes triumphing over personal adversity to excel at their chosen sport is an inspiration to us all. So I would like to thank our athletes and pay special tribute to all the unsung heroes around them: the coaches, the physios, the volunteers all those people who put in enormous amounts of time so they could succeed. Thank you and congratulations on your success. KEVIN HAGUE (Green): I wish to add the Green Party s congratulations to our Paralympic team. To compete at the elite level in any sport requires determination, commitment, and sacrifice. Our Paralympic team had those attributes in spades. These Paralympics perhaps mark the point not only in this country but in others around the world where Paralympic sport is seen as elite sport in its own right. That is a great milestone to have reached. I share the concerns that David Shearer has just expressed about the decisions made by the sports editors of our media. I cite Richard Boock s column in the Sunday Star-Times where he noted that the media had misjudged the public mood, our desire to actually see our paralympian team competing on the world stage. Our team has been an inspiration to people living with disabilities. They have been an inspiration to those of us who look out the window and decide we do not want to go to training, because it is too hilly, or it is raining, or we just cannot be bothered. They have also unlocked a gateway for the New Zealand public in that we may finally now honour the rights of people with disabilities to be full members of our own society. Thank you. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader NZ First): The London Paralympics were a great success and particularly so for our New Zealand team. New Zealand First stands with all parties here today in congratulating our paralympians on their efforts and great achievements. Hon TARIANA TURIA (Co-Leader Māori Party): I am really delighted to be able to share with every party in the House today the pride and excitement that we have experienced over these last 2 weeks with the amazing success of the New Zealand team at the London 2012 Paralympics. Yesterday as I landed at Whakatāne Airport I arrived at the same time as a reception was being extended to welcome home Ngāti Awa and Te Arawa mountain bike superstar, Karen Hanlen. In reflecting on her meteoric climb to the London Paralympics, she said her approach was built upon the philosophy that pain is temporary and pride is for ever. It is a philosophy that every single one of the 24 New Zealand athletes who competed at the Paralympics has demonstrated in abundance. These stars of many sports, including cycling, shooting, swimming, and shot-put, have shown the world that even when others have said they could not, the determination of these athletes revealed that they could, and they are. In doing so, they have lifted our collective pride. They have shown us all what we are capable of if only we believe. Our Paralympians are true champions, for they have persevered. They have withstood every challenge and they have invested every moment of their lives in representing Aotearoa on the international sporting stage. In doing so, they have shattered stereotypes and

7 11 Sep 2012 Motions 5033 shifted perceptions. They have demonstrated that it is not the disability that defines them; it is the way they deal with the challenges that that disability presents them with. Within the disability sector we often talk about the aspiration to live a good life, an ordinary life, a life unburdened by the stigma and discrimination of a disabling society. The New Zealand Paralympian squad goes that one step further, and reminds us that the only difference between the impossible and the possible lies in the spirit of determination. There have been some truly remarkable achievements in London. The talents of Sophie Pascoe left us in no doubt of the power of having a dream. Phillipa Gray, Mary Fisher, and Laura Thompson were not content with the honour of a gold medal; they went on and won silver and bronze as well. These are truly multi-performers. The former Disabled Māori Sportsperson of the Year, Cameron Leslie, not only earned gold in the Olympic swimming pool, he is also a member of the New Zealand Wheel Blacks successful rugby squad. Each of our 24 stars and each of their coaches and managers, and their families around us, could teach us all about the power of positive thinking. The Māori Party applauds the New Zealand Paralympic squad for, and congratulates it on, their amazing success. Tēnā tātou katoa. Hon JOHN BANKS (Leader ACT): The extraordinary television coverage that we saw on the news at night was of the elation of the New Zealand winners with their gold, silver, and bronze medals. The sheer elation on their faces said everything about the quality of themselves, their family supporters, their team-mates, and the whole of the country. I rise on behalf of the ACT Party to give our warmest congratulations to the New Zealand Paralympics Team on its outstanding achievements in The team brought home a total of 17 medals, including six gold, seven silver, and four bronze. Per capita country entered, it must have been one of the highest. The Paralympians are an inspiration for all of us. They live with disabilities that many people would think would hold them back, but instead they have gone on to participate and succeed in sport at the very highest level. I hope their success is of particular inspiration to young people living with disabilities, who need to know that they can achieve anything with the support of the community, with the support of their families, and with the support of their country. Swimmer Sophie Pascoe is to be congratulated on her remarkable success in the swimming pool. She alone won half of New Zealand s total gold medals. I am reminded this afternoon of my old friend from Whangarei Murdoch Ross, who has cerebral palsy. A sign on his wall, which has been there for the last 50 years, says it all, does it not: Obstacles are what you see when you look away from the goal. This attitude has truly done New Zealand proud at the Paralympics Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader United Future): On behalf of United Future I want to associate myself with the comments that others have made to congratulate our Paralympic team on its remarkable success at the London Paralympic Games. I imagine that many people felt that, coming on the back of the successful Olympic Games, it would be very difficult to, firstly, mount a level of interest in what would happen at the Paralympic Games, and, secondly, to match what we thought was an extraordinary level of achievement by our able-bodied athletes in London. But in many senses our paralympians have surpassed them not only Sophie Pascoe, who must be probably our most successful Olympic athlete ever, in terms of her medal success both here and in Beijing, but also the team as a whole. This was a proud achievement by a committed and dedicated group of New Zealanders. I share the concern expressed by the Leader of the Opposition and others that it was just a pity we did not get to see very much of it on television. I sincerely hope that television bosses will take that lesson on board when it comes to covering the next

8 5034 Motions 11 Sep 2012 Paralympic Games, because these are athletes of high quality, high dedication, high commitment, and high skills. It was comforting and, I think, almost flying in the face of the lack of coverage that New Zealanders as a whole embraced the team over the last couple of weeks. Despite the anonymity of what we were seeing, we got to know about these athletes and their successes, and encouraged them in their ongoing endeavours. My warmest congratulations to them. They have done their cause, and our cause as a country, extremely proud. I doubt there will ever be a team anywhere that will go away with such small numbers and come back with such a high proportion of medal success as our paralympians. Motion agreed to. QUESTIONS FOR ORAL ANSWER QUESTIONS TO MINISTERS Economies, International Effect on New Zealand 1. JOHN HAYES (National Wairarapa) to the Minister of Finance: What advice has he received on the impact global economic developments are having on the New Zealand economy? Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): The global outlook remains uncertain. Europe, in particular, continues to grapple with longstanding problems of excessive debt, with significant decisions being made in Europe this week. It has, however, demonstrated an ability to maintain stability while dealing with deep-seated long-term problems. Growth is expected to be maintained at reasonable levels in our second-largest trading partner, China. The outlook for Australia is less positive than it was, but it still remains one of the faster-growing developed economies. Hon John Banks: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The parliamentary Opposition during the answer from the Minister was yapping out Tidy yourself up. Why don t you tidy yourself up?. I make no comment about that, but I think you are doing a great job and should berate them. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member does remind members in the House that when they say you they are referring to the Speaker. I did look at the member who made that interjection. He seemed unaware of what he had actually said. Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. If you look at the question, it asks the Minister what advice he has received. Well, we are still waiting to hear what that advice was. We heard just his opinion of how the rest of the world is. Mr SPEAKER: Well, one assumes that that is the advice he has received. Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. You might assume that, but for the rest of us and the country, we would like to know what advice he got and where he got it from. [Interruption] Mr SPEAKER: Order! A point of order has been raised. Had the question asked what advice he had got and where he got it from, there may have been a different answer, but the question did not actually ask that. Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The question was what advice he has received. You could pad it out by saying and from whom and what day did you get it?, but, strictly speaking, it is a simple question. I would like to know what advice he received, not what his views are on the international economy. Mr SPEAKER: Order! During question time the right honourable gentleman has absolutely that right to ask that question. He can ask specifically for the source of the advice received. That is absolutely why supplementary questions are allowed.

9 11 Sep 2012 Questions for Oral Answer 5035 John Hayes: In the light of New Zealand s increasing economic links with the Asia- Pacific region, what are the immediate prospects for APEC economies? Hon BILL ENGLISH: The immediate prospects for these economies on our doorstep are reasonably good. The IMF is forecasting growth of 4.2 percent for the APEC area in 2012 and 4.5 percent in This is considerably faster than developed economies, and compares with forecast world growth of around 3.5 percent. Ten APEC countries will grow by 4 percent or more this year, which means that in those countries there will be more people with bigger incomes who are willing to pay more for our products. That is good news for New Zealand. John Hayes: How are international observers viewing the immediate outlook for China, and how will this impact on New Zealand s growth prospects? Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. This Minister has no responsibility for international people none at all. If he was asked about advice or reports or something like that, he might have responsibility, but we have been told that we have to be straight and down the line, and have questions within the Standing Orders and Speakers rulings. When they are written patsies, there is no excuse Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member was fine up until that point. The member makes a perfectly reasonable point that Ministers can be asked their opinions about matters, but if there is no direct responsibility for what they are being asked about, probably the question should refer to advice or reports that the Minister may have received. John Hayes: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The second part of my question, and I will just repeat it, asked how this would impact on New Zealand s growth prospects. I think that is a very fair question to put to the Minister of Finance. Mr SPEAKER: The member makes a fair point in response. The latter part of the question indeed asked that, and that is absolutely within the Minister s responsibility. Hon BILL ENGLISH: Given that it is among the fastest-growing economies in the world, what happens with China does matter to New Zealand. There seems to be a range of views, but a general view would be that China s growth will be a bit lower this year than it was last year, partly because of the impact of lower demand in Europe. The way this impacts on New Zealand s growth prospects is that it is our second-largest trading partner, and Chinese demand for our products will determine our income, to a significant extent. China is Australia s largest trading partner and remains our largest trading partner, so how Australia does is affected by China. John Hayes: What other reports has he received on New Zealand s economic prospects, given the significant challenges faced by economies in other parts of the world? Hon BILL ENGLISH: I recently met with representatives of credit rating agencies Moody s and Standard and Poor s. They have noted the good progress the Government is making in getting its own finances in order and returning to surplus, while many other countries face many more years of deficits and rising debt. They note that our moderate growth rate and our positive household savings rate compare favourably with that of many other developed countries, but they reiterate our need to reduce our high levels of household debt, which remain as yet New Zealand s single-biggest vulnerability to international economic events. Exchange Rate Commentary and Potential Consequences of Devaluation 2. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader NZ First) to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with the New Zealand Manufacturers and Exporters Association, the International Monetary Fund, and the Reserve Bank of New Zealand that the New Zealand dollar is overvalued?

10 5036 Questions for Oral Answer 11 Sep 2012 Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): We do agree with their level of discomfort about the high level of the New Zealand dollar, but we certainly do not agree with the view held by the Manufacturers and Exporters Association that the New Zealand dollar should be devalued to US60c. This would amount to around a 25 percent devaluation, implying an exchange rate against the Australian dollar of just 58c. That means a drop in income and living standards across the board in New Zealand of about 20 percent. If they think there is a gap between us and Australia now, then following the Manufacturers and Exporters Association call for a 25 percent devaluation, that gap would widen into a chasm and thousands of New Zealanders would be leaving for Australia because of its much higher standard of living. Rt Hon Winston Peters: Does he agree with John Walley, Chief Executive Officer of the New Zealand Manufacturers and Exporters Association, that the overvalued dollar has cost the exports sector up to $10 billion over the past 3½ years? Hon BILL ENGLISH: No, I do not agree with that. We do agree that the high level of the exchange rate does put a lot of pressure on exporters. The Government is taking every measure it can to exercise its indirect influence on the exchange rate to help our exporters be more competitive. But we do not agree with the view of New Zealand First, the Manufacturers and Exporters Association, and the Labour Party that the New Zealand dollar should be significantly devalued. That would cut the incomes and the standard of living of all New Zealanders. Rt Hon Winston Peters: Will he acknowledge that the overvalued dollar is contributing to rising unemployment, with hundreds of jobs being lost in the export sector every month for example, the 100 jobs recently lost at Tīwai Point, the 120 redundancies at Solid Energy s Huntly East mine, the 100 jobs set to go at the Kawerau mill, or the up to 400 jobs that hang in the balance at Spring Creek Mine, all because of an uncompetitive exchange rate? Hon BILL ENGLISH: All of those job losses are regrettable but probably unavoidable. What we owe to the people who have lost those jobs is to continue to support the many businesses that are creating jobs. In the last 2 years this economy has created 50,000 net new jobs and over the next 4 years we expect about another 150,000 net new jobs. In an environment of relatively low growth rates and grumpy growth, some companies will be shedding jobs, and more other companies are growing jobs. Rt Hon Winston Peters: Is it correct that under section 17 of the Reserve Bank of New Zealand Act the Minister of Finance may, for the purpose of influencing the exchange rate or exchange rate trends, from time to time, by notice in writing to the bank, direct the bank to deal in foreign exchange within guidelines prescribed by the Minister in the notice, which is not certainly you, because you have got no experience whatsoever in this area? Hon BILL ENGLISH: Yes, the member is correct about what is in the Reserve Bank of New Zealand Act. However, it would be irresponsible of any Minister of Finance of New Zealand to instruct the Reserve Bank to try to achieve what he, the Labour Party, the Greens, and the Manufacturers and Exporters Association want, and that is a 20 percent devaluation of the New Zealand currency. That would be extremely risky for the New Zealand taxpayer, but, worse than that, it would cut the standard of living of every New Zealand household by 20 percent. Hon David Parker: If an inflated exchange rate lies at the heart of our exporters problems, our external deficit, and job losses, why will he not do anything about it? Hon BILL ENGLISH: What lies at the heart of their challenges was the very poor economic policy under the Labour Government where, up to 2008, New Zealand lost competitiveness at a rate among the worst in the developed world. This Government is having to work very hard to re-establish that competitiveness.

11 11 Sep 2012 Questions for Oral Answer 5037 Hon David Parker: Does he stand by his statement that New Zealand operates best-practice monetary policy, or does he now accept that the economic objectives of the Reserve Bank should be widened to include more than inflation? Hon BILL ENGLISH: Yes, I do stand by the statement, and if the member read the policy targets agreement he would see that it does encompass other economic objectives. Hon David Parker: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My question was whether the economic objectives of the Reserve Bank, which are actually laid out in statute, should be widened to more than inflation, and the Minister has not addressed that part of the question. Mr SPEAKER: I will allow the member to repeat his question if there is uncertainty. Hon David Parker: Does he stand by his statement that New Zealand operates best-practice monetary policy, or does he now accept that the economic objectives of the Reserve Bank should be widened in the statute to include more than inflation? Mr SPEAKER: Before I call the Minister, the Minister actually answered the first part of that question. It is a shame the member did not restrict his question to just the last bit, if he wanted that answered. The Minister answered whether he stood by the [Interruption] Order! I gave the member the benefit of the doubt; I should have trusted my initial judgment. Rt Hon Winston Peters: In the light of the Minister s first answer, and given that he does have the power to do something about the overvalued dollar, when will he stop Nero fiddling whilst New Zealand manufacturing, New Zealand exporting, and New Zealand jobs continue to burn? Hon BILL ENGLISH: As I have already said, the Government is working across a wide range of fronts, from infrastructure to skills, to supporting exporters in our export markets, and to sorting out the allocation and use of our natural resources, all as mechanisms to assist the competitiveness of our exporters. However, we do not intend to pursue a devaluation of the New Zealand dollar that would cut the living standards of New Zealand households by 20 percent, as advocated by the Opposition parties. Rt Hon Winston Peters: Given the extreme urgency of this issue, I seek leave for the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (Amending Primary Function of Bank) Amendment Bill to have its first reading immediately after question time today. Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection? There is objection. Schools Supplying Food to Students 3. DAVID SHEARER (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement in relation to food in schools that most of those decile one to three schools have that and are dealing with the issue ; if so, is he therefore satisfied that all children attending New Zealand schools are having their nutritional needs met and are arriving in classrooms ready to learn? Hon BILL ENGLISH (Acting Prime Minister): Yes, the Prime Minister stands by his full statement, which was that In my experience, most of those decile one to three schools have that and are dealing with the issue. But obviously, you ll see with a number of schools [for instance] on the waiting list for the KidsCan that more needs to be done. I also noted that the Government provides fruit in schools indeed, all decile 1 and 2 primary and intermediate schools are able to opt into this scheme and the Government provides funding to KidsCan for its food for kids programme. As the member will know, we all want children to have their nutritional needs met and arrive

12 5038 Questions for Oral Answer 11 Sep 2012 in classes ready to learn. The Government is keen to help where that is required, but the fundamental responsibility lies with the parents of those children to feed them. David Shearer: Has he seen comments from the principal of Finlayson Park School in Manurewa, who said that she is spending $9,000 a year to feed hungry students and that s $9,000 not being spent on teaching and learning, and is this what he meant when he said schools were dealing with the issue? Hon BILL ENGLISH: I have not seen those particular comments, but I am sure that principal is doing everything she can to lift the achievement of those children. As the member should know, it is important in the case of feeding children that the Government provides support where it is required but does not act in a way that takes from families the responsibility for feeding their own children. I know that the member does not believe it is their responsibility; he wants all children to be fed at school. Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is sufficient. David Shearer: How does arguing about this issue resting on parent responsibility, which we all agree on, solve the problem tomorrow morning when more than 80,000 children will turn up to school hungry? Hon BILL ENGLISH: I have outlined the range of careful measures the Government is taking to provide help where it is most needed. We do not intend to go down the track of taking from families the responsibility to feed their own children. It is a fundamental responsibility of a parent. David Shearer: Given that his Government is spending $560,000 on sports equipment for private schools and just $320,000 on KidsCan, on feeding kids in schools, does he believe he has his educational priorities right? Hon BILL ENGLISH: Yes, we do have our educational priorities right. We have committed $9 billion, actually, to the funding of achievement in State-run schools. What we recognise and that member does not is that it is important that the Government does not act in this area in a way that undermines the responsibilities of families to feed their own children. David Shearer: In light of his comment on fruit in schools, is he suggesting that if a kid turns up hungry at school and is given a piece of fruit, that child is equipped with the nutritional needs it needs for the rest of the day? Hon BILL ENGLISH: In some cases it might be. There are children who do have fruit for breakfast. In fact, I thought under the previous Government s Healthy Eating - Healthy Action programme it was trying to make our children eat fruit for breakfast. Tertiary Institutions 2011 Performance 4. NIKKI KAYE (National Auckland Central) to the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment: What reports has he received regarding the performance of the tertiary education sector? Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment): On Thursday last week I released the 2011 tertiary education performance data. The information shows that the universities, polytechnics, wānanga, and private training establishments have once again improved their course and qualification completion rates as well as their student retention rates. Course completion rates across the tertiary sector have risen from 77 percent in 2009 to 82 percent in 2011, with qualification rates over the same period increasing from 62 percent to 71 percent. Nikki Kaye: What has the Government done to help the sector achieve these results? Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The Government has incentivised better performance by providers by introducing performance-linked funding based on educational performance indicators including course completions, qualification completions, progression to higher levels, and retention. We have also published on the Tertiary Education

13 11 Sep 2012 Questions for Oral Answer 5039 Commission website the performance information for all providers for the benefit of students, their families, and other stakeholders. The Tertiary Education Commission has supported the focus on performance by taking a more active investment approach, and withdrawing funding from poor-performing courses and also from short award courses that do not result in formal qualifications. Nikki Kaye: What information has he seen regarding the performance of Māori and Pasifika students in the tertiary education sector? Hon STEVEN JOYCE: A recent report by the Tertiary Education Commission highlighted that the results for Māori and Pasifika students have greatly improved. Particularly pleasing is the strong increase in Māori and Pasifika course and qualification completion rates, which have increased more than the overall sector average. Māori course completion rates are up 9 percent from 2009 to 2011 and qualification rates are up 7 percent. Pasifika course completion rates are up 9 percent from 2009 to 2011 and qualification rates are also up 7 percent. There is still more work to do, but this is very good progress. Child Poverty Financial Support 5. METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader Green) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement, I don t think that [universal child payment] is at all likely; we went away from that some years ago. In New Zealand we have a very targeted system through Working for Families.? Hon BILL ENGLISH (Acting Prime Minister): Yes. Metiria Turei: How does the very targeted in-work tax credit child payment system, which he claims is better than a universal payment for children, help the children of New Zealand s poorest families whose parents do not work enough hours to qualify for that child payment? Hon BILL ENGLISH: Those families the member is referring to are, of course, on benefits or are the recipients of the guaranteed minimum family income. The in-work tax credit was designed by the previous Labour Government as a payment for those who were in what was then defined as full-time work. So, by definition, those who are not in full-time work do not qualify for it. Metiria Turei: If, as the Prime Minister claims, very targeted assistance is better than a universal child payment, will he then support my bill, which specifically targets a child payment to New Zealand s poorest children whose parents cannot find enough work, because unemployment is so high? Hon BILL ENGLISH: The answer is that the Government will not be supporting the member s bill. But she is giving a misleading impression that children in households where the parents are not working are not the recipients of a child payment. Of course they are, as part of the benefit payment. The member can argue about whether that payment should be larger I suspect she thinks it should be but there are child payments per child to beneficiary households. Metiria Turei: How is it fair to the children of families in Christchurch, for example, who lost their jobs due to the earthquake that they lose both their employment income and their in-work tax credit child payment? How does that give those kids who need it the most a good life and a fair future? Hon BILL ENGLISH: For families in Christchurch it is difficult when they lose their jobs, as it is for many other families where a job is lost. There is income support in place for those families, which includes child payments. As I said before, the member can argue whether they should be larger, but child payments are incorporated. The inwork tax credit was designed on the principle of work first a principle that I see has recently been endorsed by the Children s Commissioner s expert group. It is designed

14 5040 Questions for Oral Answer 11 Sep 2012 as a payment to families to encourage full-time work, and appears to have been successful in doing that. Metiria Turei: Does the Minister not agree that the in-work tax credit child payment has failed to provide sufficient support to those families who need it the most and the children who need it the most, because parents who might work but do not qualify for enough hours do not get access to that payment, leaving more than 200,000 children in families who do not qualify and who live well below the poverty line? Is that not a failure? Hon BILL ENGLISH: It is not a failure of the in-work tax credit, because the inwork tax credit was designed by the previous Government supported by the National Party at the time as an incentive to work. That appears to have been successful. If the member is concerned about the absolute level of income of those on benefit, then she is quite free to advocate that there should be larger payments. But the in-work tax credit is there for a particular purpose, and we do not intend to change that purpose. Metiria Turei: Why is the Prime Minister opposing all the options for a child payment that will reach the poorest of New Zealand s children, including the universal child payment that has been proposed by the Children s Commissioner for those children zero to 6 years old, and a targeted child payment, as proposed in my bill, that will go to the children of the poorest families, when he knows that 270,000 children are living in poverty a situation that his Government is making worse? When will he step out of la-la land and do something for the poorest kids? Hon BILL ENGLISH: I will not deal with each of the member s propositions, but the universal payment proposed by the Children s Commissioner s expert group is, I have to say, a bit unspecified. The group itself recognises that it would have to be paid for, and I think it believes it could be paid for by reducing assistance to families a bit further up the income scale. When the expert group reports to the commissioner, who then reports to the Government, then, of course, we can consider all its propositions. The Government s focus for low-income families is on dealing with those factors that would lead to persistent poverty and vulnerability. So, for instance, the Minister for Social Development has announced the social obligations, which are part of the encouragement for those who are on benefit with children to get their children into early childhood education, and part of the encouragement for them to look for appropriate part-time work and to get the kinds of skills that will help them lift income. So we have a strong focus on those families being able to get work as a top priority. Hon Peter Dunne: What advice has the Minister received about the impact on lowincome working families of a shift away from the current targeted arrangement to a more universal payment in respect of children? Hon BILL ENGLISH: I have not asked for particular advice on that, but I think I could guess what it would say. It would say that a move from a targeted programme to a lower universal payment would leave many low-income working families worse off, to start with, and, secondly, would leave them in a less beneficial position, relevant to being on the benefit. It has been a focus of social policy, regardless of party, in New Zealand in the last 20 years to ensure that the reward for work is significantly greater than the income that one can receive on benefit. We intend to maintain that policy. Metiria Turei: Why on earth is the Prime Minister opposing any solution, whether it is increasing the minimum wage, food in schools, a universal child payment for some kids, or a targeted payment for the poorest kids? Why is he refusing to support any solution that will help the children he knows are in the worst poverty in this country? What did those kids do to deserve his Government s neglect and derision? Hon BILL ENGLISH: I find those comments offensive, actually. The Government is actually dealing with a wide range of complex issues to ensure that people have the

15 11 Sep 2012 Questions for Oral Answer 5041 opportunity to lift themselves out of the position they are in where they are on low income. The real danger to children is persistent deprivation that goes with low income. That is a relatively smaller proportion of the 200,000 she refers to, and the Government s measures, particularly in welfare reform, which is a very comprehensive programme, are designed to promote mobility for those families. But, again, I would deny the member s assertion that the Government is treating these children with neglect and derision. That is typical of the kinds of exaggerated claims she makes to try to get into the political debate. Welfare Reforms Outstanding Arrest Warrants and Requirements for Parents 6. Peseta SAM LOTU-IIGA (National Maungakiekie) to the Minister for Social Development: What recent announcements has she made on the Government s comprehensive welfare reforms? Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development): Today we have announced that as part of the Government s welfare reforms we are introducing social obligations for those beneficiaries with children. These social obligations will require that their children are attending 15 hours a week early childhood education from age 3, attending school from age 5 or 6, and enrolled with a general practitioner, and that they complete core Well Child / Tāmariki Ora checks. I believe these obligations are reasonable, achievable, and reflect the expectations of most New Zealanders. Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga: How will these new social obligations ensure education and health services benefit vulnerable children? Hon PAULA BENNETT: Many of our most vulnerable children are dependent on adults in the benefit system, and this is an opportunity to make sure we give these children the best start in life. Research shows that only 40 percent of DPB recipients and only 60 percent of those on the unemployment benefit with a child of early childhood education age were attending early childhood education. We want to get that number up. That is one of the reasons the Minister of Education, Minister Parata, is targeting early childhood education attendance and has made it a key result area, and certainly I am happy to support that with this initiative. Jacinda Ardern: Does every child in New Zealand at age 3 have access to early childhood education today? Hon PAULA BENNETT: No, and that is why we have said with the obligations that if there are barriers that people cannot overcome, we want to try to help them do that. But if they have got access and they are not taking it up, then there may be sanctions further down the process. Jacinda Ardern: What requirements will there be for parents who are not on benefits to fulfil her social obligations? Hon PAULA BENNETT: As I said, the Minister of Education is putting quite a targeted approach around those who are not actually attending early childhood education, in that there is a requirement, and it would be very helpful for them to be there. This is about those who are on benefits. We know that many of these children are our most vulnerable and do need that kind of support. We can put this lever in, and we are. [Interruption] Mr SPEAKER: Order! I want to hear this next supplementary question. Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga: What other announcements has she made that make changes to the welfare system? Hon PAULA BENNETT: It is fair to say that it has been very comprehensive. Last week we announced that people with outstanding arrest warrants will no longer receive the benefit while evading the police. If someone has an unresolved arrest warrant, we

16 5042 Questions for Oral Answer 11 Sep 2012 will stop their benefit until they do the right thing and come forward to the authorities. The truth is that at any one time there are 15 [Interruption] Mr SPEAKER: Order! Close though I am to the Minister, I can no longer hear her answer, given the level of interjection. It is not reasonable. All members have a right to ask questions. Hon PAULA BENNETT: Certainly the Opposition can call out, but this is what is called doing your job. That party actually did not do it for 9 years, so there is a lot for me to pick up and actually get right in the welfare system. So if it had gone back and done this many, many years ago, as should have been done at any one time there are 15,000 people in New Zealand with more than 37,000 warrants, and, of those people, 8,200 are on a benefit. We are effectively paying them for being on the run from the police. I think that is disgraceful. I think it is disgraceful that that party let that go for 9 long years, and it is time that this Government actually tidied that up. Mr SPEAKER: Question No. 7, Grant Robertson. [Interruption] Order! I want to hear this question. Environment Canterbury Postponement of Elections 7. GRANT ROBERTSON (Deputy Leader Labour) to the Minister of Local Government: Does he agree with the statement by the previous Minister for Local Government, Hon Dr Nick Smith Under any circumstances the next regional council elections in Canterbury will take place no later than the elections scheduled for late 2013? Hon DAVID CARTER (Minister of Local Government): I did at the time. Nick Smith made those comments in March 2010, and although it may have escaped the attention of the member, we have had since then four major earthquake events in Christchurch. The member will also know that the quote he just read out from Nick Smith went on to say this: The explicit intent is for the commissioners to withdraw and be replaced by elected representatives as soon as their task is achieved and the present systemic issues are resolved. The commissioners are doing an outstanding job and have made good progress, but the job is not yet complete. Grant Robertson: How can it not be a broken promise to the people of Canterbury that they would be able to elect their own regional council, when the former Minister said that under any circumstances elections would take place in 2013? Hon DAVID CARTER: Because, as I have just said to the member, Nick Smith went on to say: The explicit intent is for the commissioners to withdraw and be replaced as soon as their task is achieved. Because of the earthquake event, because progress is still not finalised around the Canterbury Water Management Strategy, that job is not yet complete. Grant Robertson: To whom are the commissioners running Environment Canterbury accountable: his Government or the people of Canterbury? Hon DAVID CARTER: At this stage the people who are responsible are the seven appointed commissioners. Mr SPEAKER: The Minister may not have heard the question clearly. The question asked to whom they are responsible: the Government or the local people of Canterbury. Hon DAVID CARTER: I apologise. I did not hear the question properly. The commissioners are responsible both to the Government and to the people of Canterbury. Grant Robertson: Is he familiar with the phrase No taxation without representation, and why does he think ratepayers in the Canterbury region should continue to pay rates when his Government is denying them the right to be democratically represented at a regional level?

17 11 Sep 2012 Questions for Oral Answer 5043 Hon DAVID CARTER: Because of the circumstances. Those Cantabrians had been asked to pay rates to a regional council that was the worst-performing regional council out of 84. They had been asked to pay rates to a regional council that an independent report concluded was ineffective and dysfunctional. Denis O Rourke: Will the Minister give an undertaking to the electors in the Canterbury region that they will be given the opportunity, through a comprehensive consultation process, to have a say on the main options for the reform of local government in the region before the Government introduces legislation to end the local democracy - free zone there? Hon DAVID CARTER: It is the intention of the Government to have the legislation put before the select committee. That will be the opportunity for Cantabrians to have their say. It is worth noting that at this stage the only negative comments I have seen have been from the Labour Party, the Christchurch Press, and two former disgruntled Environment Canterbury councillors: Eugenie Sage and Kerry Burke. Grant Robertson: Does he agree with the statement Elections are central to democracy but they are not always, on their own, a magic or quick-fix solution., made by Frank Bainimarama, and which does he think is likely to occur first: elections in Fiji or elections for Environment Canterbury? Hon DAVID CARTER: I do not think there would be any Government that wanted to roll over local democracy, but when local democracy is not working, as was the case recently with the Kaipara District Council, Governments have to act. I note that in the case of the Kaipara District Council there was absolutely no criticism from Grant Robertson. Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I appreciate my question had two parts to it, but I do not think the Minister addressed whether he agreed with Frank Bainimarama, or whether elections were going to happen in Fiji Mr SPEAKER: Order! Given the nature of the question the answer was not too bad. Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. It was a serious question, but what I am wondering is whether there has been some effect on the Government benches of your borrowing your tie from Mr Ryall. Mr SPEAKER: Order! I do not see how that is a point of order. The question that was being referred to was asking for an opinion, and a precise answer is never possible when an opinion is being sought. Jacqui Dean: Has the Minister seen any reports that show that the performance of Environment Canterbury has dramatically improved since commissioners were appointed? Hon DAVID CARTER: Yes. I have seen a report that showed that this council under the commissioners processed 92 percent of resource consents within the statutory time frames in This is a massive increase from just 29 percent in under the former model. I am also aware of a number of very positive reports from a wide range of stakeholders in relation to last week s announcements, including Ngāi Tahu, Local Government New Zealand, Federated Farmers, and a large number of mayors from the region. They all stated that the commissioners have been a dramatic improvement and have done a fantastic job. As I mentioned earlier, the only negative comments that I have seen are from the Labour Party, the Christchurch Press and that would be of little surprise to any of us and two former disgruntled councillors Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member should not be making those sorts of comments. Hon Lianne Dalziel: Why did the Minister not agree with his own department s advice, and also the advice of the Ministry for the Environment, that there be a return to a fully locally elected democratic body under a transitional plan; if he did agree with that at any point, why did he change his mind?