Thursday, 8 June 2023 [Volume 768] The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m. KARAKIA/PRAYERS GREG O'CONNOR (Deputy Speaker): Almighty God, we give thanks for the blessings which have been bestowed on us. Laying aside all personal interests, we acknowledge the King and pray for guidance in our deliberations, that we may conduct the affairs of this House with wisdom, justice, mercy, and humility for the welfare and peace of New Zealand. Amen. VISITORS Commonwealth Parliamentary Association—UK Branch Delegation SPEAKER: I'm sure that members would wish to welcome the Rt Hon Dame Maria Miller MP, Chair of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association UK Branch, and her accompanying delegation, who are present in the gallery. BUSINESS STATEMENT Hon KIERAN McANULTY (Deputy Leader of the House): Today, the House will adjourn until Tuesday, 20 June. In that week, legislation to be considered will include the first readings of the Emergency Management Bill, the Ngāti Hei Claims Settlement Bill, and the Ngāti Paoa Claims Settlement Bill; the committee stages of the Business Payment Practices Bill, the Charities Amendment Bill, the Deposit Takers Bill, the Fuel Industry Amendment Bill, and the Worker Protection (Migrant and Other Employees) Bill; and the remaining stages of the Grocery Industry Competition Bill. Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): I thank the acting leader of the House for that update. I'm sure he'll agree that, given the way select committees and report-backs are going, it's going to be an extremely busy July and August, in the lead up to the adjournment of this Parliament. While I know it's the Business Committee's prerogative, can I encourage the acting leader to ensure that where there are plans for urgency and extended sittings that they are signalled well in advance in order that they can be planned for? Hon KIERAN McANULTY (Deputy Leader of the House): Yes, the member is well within his rights to encourage me to do that, but we will, as we always do, wherever possible, give as much notice as possible. PETITIONS, PAPERS, SELECT COMMITTEE REPORTS, AND INTRODUCTION OF BILLS SPEAKER: No petitions have been delivered to the Clerk for presentation. No papers have been delivered to the Clerk for presentation. Select committee reports have been delivered for presentation. CLERK: Reports of the Finance and Expenditure Committee on the: Inland Revenue Department, Long-Term Insights Briefing 2022 Reserve Bank of New Zealand, Monetary Policy Statement, May 2023, and Water Services Legislation Bill reports of the Health Committee on the: 2021/22 Annual reviews of the Health Promotion Agency, the Taranaki District Health Board, and the Whanganui District Health Board, and Petition of Millie Grant: Place a purchase limit on pharmaceuticals such as paracetamol in supermarkets report of the Justice Committee on the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Community Participation) Amendment Bill report of the Petitions Committee on the Petition of Patricia Fabish and the Sensible Sentencing Group Trust: Stop editing Victim Impact Statements in New Zealand, and the report of the Regulations Review Committee on the second interim report Complaint about the E-Scooters (Declaration not to be motor vehicles) Notice 2018. SPEAKER: The bills are set down for second reading. The Long-Term Insights Briefing, Monetary Policy Statement, and interim report on the complaint are set down for consideration. The Clerk has been informed of the introduction of a bill. CLERK: Employment Relations (Protection for Kiwisaver Members) Amendment Bill introduction. SPEAKER: That bill is set down for first reading. ORAL QUESTIONS QUESTIONS TO MINISTERS Question No. 1—Prime Minister 1. NICOLA WILLIS (Deputy Leader—National) to the Prime Minister: On what dates, if any, did the Cabinet Office communicate with the Prime Minister or the Office of the Prime Minister since November 2020 regarding Hon Michael Wood's shareholdings? Hon KELVIN DAVIS (Minister for Māori Crown Relations: Te Arawhiti): on behalf of the Prime Minister: The Cabinet Office has not communicated with the Prime Minister or his current office prior to last week. I am advised that the previous Prime Minister was informed that the Hon Michael Wood was in the process of divesting shares in Auckland Airport and Contact Energy as part of the annual reviews of ministerial interest in November 2021 and November 2022. She was also informed he had divested his shares in March 2021, however, this was incorrect advice. In February 2022, the then chief of staff was informed by the Cabinet Office that they had provided advice to the Hon Michael Wood about divesting, and that the Minister had advised he was in the process of divesting the shares. Nicola Willis: Why, despite an entire year passing between checks from the Prime Minister as to whether or not the shares had been sold and no action having been taken, were those shares not registered on the official conflict of interest register? Hon KELVIN DAVIS: There is no question that he should have done it quicker. I'm not going to defend his failure to do it when told he should have followed the advice, and he accepts that. Hon Michael Woodhouse: Point of order, Mr Speaker. The answer there was referring to the Minister's actions. Nicola Willis was asking about the actions taken by the Prime Minister's office and Cabinet, and it hasn't been addressed. SPEAKER: I agree, and I ask Nicola Willis to ask the question again. Nicola Willis: I'll do my best to use the same words. Why, despite a year passing between the Prime Minister first being made aware of the shareholding and those shares not being divested, were they not registered on the official register of conflicts of interest? Hon KELVIN DAVIS: There is an investigation being conducted by Sir Maarten Wevers, and I believe it is appropriate to let that investigation run its course, and we'll find out all the information we need to know in due course. SPEAKER: The investigation being mentioned is about a member as a member of Parliament. Members can ask about their ministerial responsibilities and Cabinet responsibilities, so the Minister has not addressed that part. Hon KELVIN DAVIS: I believe the Minister did declare his shares in the register in 2022. Nicola Willis: Why, in 2021, did Minister Wood not declare his shares on the ministerial declaration of conflicts of interest when not only he knew that he hadn't sold them but the Cabinet Office knew, the Prime Minister knew, and nothing was done about it? Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Again, there is no question that the Minister should have done it quicker and I'm not going to defend his failure to do so. He should have followed the advice that he got, and he accepts that. Nicola Willis: Does the Prime Minister retain confidence in the Cabinet Office's process for managing conflicts of interest when 2½ years went by in which a conflict of interest was not declared or registered, despite the Cabinet Office being aware it existed? Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Yes. Nicola Willis: What sort of standards exist in this Government that a Minister can have a conflict of interest for 2½ years, not declare it, not manage it, and that person remains a Minister? Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Again, I'm not going to stand here and defend the Minister's actions. He knows that he should've declared those interests sooner. He accepts that advice. Nicola Willis: Is the Prime Minister aware that not only did the Minister mismanage his pecuniary interest register and his Cabinet declaration but he also misled a journalist in July 2021; when specifically asked if he had any pecuniary interests he had not declared, he expressly said he had not—is that acceptable? SPEAKER: There is a part of the question that probably should not have been mentioned. Every member should be aware that the pecuniary interest process is separate to the Cabinet. So I would ask the Minister to respond to the part of the question that dealt with the Cabinet processes and the ministerial process. Hon KELVIN DAVIS: I am advised that the Minister has answered questions in what he understood was accurate at the time. Nicola Willis: Does the Prime Minister think it was accurate? Hon KELVIN DAVIS: On behalf of the Prime Minister, they'd have to take the Minister's word at that. Nicola Willis: Why is this Prime Minister prepared to accept the word of an individual who, over the course of 2½ years, claimed they were selling shares but failed to do so, was given 12 reminders to do it, said they were doing it, hadn't done it, and today, we're told, won't even front to media to talk about it—why does that person remain a Minister? Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Well, on behalf of the Prime Minister, that's the very reason that he's been stood down from his transport portfolio. Nicola Willis: Why does he remain the Minister of Immigration, Workplace Relations and Safety, the associate finance Minister, and the Minister for Auckland issues? Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Because he's proven himself to be very competent in all of those portfolios that she's mentioned. Question No. 2—Energy and Resources 2. Hon AUPITO WILLIAM SIO (Labour—Māngere) to the Minister of Energy and Resources: How is the Government supporting communities to be more energy resilient? Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Minister of Energy and Resources): Through Budget 2023, the Government has committed to extending our successful community energy programme partnering with local organisations, including iwi, to deliver more community-based, renewable electricity projects. My intention is for this funding to enable at least 2,000 additional households to benefit from renewable electricity generation. The loss of electricity following the Auckland floods and Cyclone Gabrielle highlighted the importance of building resilience in our electricity system, especially for small and isolated communities, and our Government is committed to continuing to deliver the support to build resilience. Hon Aupito William Sio: What type of projects will be delivered as a result of this Budget 2023 funding? Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: We are investing in community energy projects such as wind power, and solar generation and batteries that will improve energy security. This will support target communities to get secure, renewable, and affordable energy. Many of these projects will enable a reliable supply of renewable energy, growing their resilience to natural hazards when power lines go down, and reducing their power bills. Hon Aupito William Sio: What support has the Government already delivered for community-based, renewable electricity projects? Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Through our Māori and Public Housing Renewable Energy Fund, we've delivered 30 renewable energy projects, with a further 12 currently under construction. When all of these projects are complete, 435 homes will benefit. We've rolled out solar photovoltaic systems on 170 public homes across New Zealand, including in Wellington, Hawke's Bay, Whangārei, Nelson, Gisborne, Auckland, Hamilton, and Christchurch. Some households funded with solar and battery systems reported they could keep the lights on when the local area was without mains power for five days following Cyclone Gabrielle. Hon Aupito William Sio: In addition to improving energy resilience, what other benefits are provided by community-based, renewable electricity projects? Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Our Government's funding through successive Budgets has helped increase energy resilience—particularly in small and isolated communities—and reduced power bills. Early reports from completed projects show all households are experiencing significantly reduced power bills, by in some cases up to 50 percent, which provides immediate financial relief for those families. Hon Aupito William Sio: Where can people find out more about community energy? Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Ara Ake, New Zealand's future energy centre, which was established by the Government in 2019, has recently launched its Community Energy How to Guide, which provides advice for communities interested in developing community energy. The guide, available on Ara Ake's website, demonstrates how community-scale projects can align with the grid to improve resilience, reduce costs, and lower emissions. I want to congratulate Ara Ake for their hard work on this project. Question No. 3—Auckland 3. Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National) to the Minister for Auckland: Does he stand by all his statements and actions? Hon MICHAEL WOOD (Minister for Auckland): Yes. In their context, I stand by my statements and actions as Minister for Auckland. Hon Paul Goldsmith: Regarding his statement yesterday that he stood by his statements to the Cabinet Office about his personal shareholdings in Auckland International Airport, what exactly did he tell the Cabinet Office following their 6 and 27 March 2023 requests to dispose of the shares? Hon MICHAEL WOOD: I would have to check the records fully, but I do not believe I have provided a formal response to those emails. Hon Paul Goldsmith: Was he arrogant enough to think he didn't need to follow the rules? Hon MICHAEL WOOD: No, but I have acknowledged and will acknowledge again that it was a serious error on my part not to be sufficiently focused on this matter. As of today, I have taken action on that by selling the shares. Hon Paul Goldsmith: Has he contacted Jonathan Milne at Newsroom since February to correct the false statement he gave him two years ago that he had nothing more to declare beyond his pecuniary interest list—a list that did not include his Auckland International Airport shareholding? SPEAKER: I'll ask the member to rephrase the question. I'm mindful that there's an investigation on this very matter. It's entirely up to the member, though. It does leave it open, though, for the Minister—whether or not that's his responsibility as a Minister of Auckland affairs. But if you want to ask it in a different way, that may be in order. Hon Paul Goldsmith: Just a point of order, Mr Speaker. I did say "since February"—since he's been Minister for Auckland—and it's a duty of all Ministers to, as Minister for Auckland, he's responsible for international connectivity— SPEAKER: But his pecuniary interests are not. Hon Paul Goldsmith: No. No, no— SPEAKER: That's right; that's what you said. Hon Paul Goldsmith: Has he contacted Jonathan Milne at Newsroom since February to correct the false statement he gave to him more than two years ago? Hon MICHAEL WOOD: No, and I reject the characterisation in the member's question. Hon Paul Goldsmith: Well, which part of the statement does he reject? Hon MICHAEL WOOD: Firstly, that was not a statement that I made as the Minister for Auckland. Secondly, I have acknowledged that over this period of time, I was not across all of the detail but I've never deliberately made a false statement. Hon Paul Goldsmith: Why did he say yesterday that he commenced the process of selling the shares in early 2022, when apparently he had made a commitment to the Cabinet Office to sell them from December 2020—more than a year earlier? Hon MICHAEL WOOD: At that earlier point, I had commenced the process—that did not proceed as far as it should have. I more fulsomely began that process in early 2022. Again, I regret that I did not complete that process. As of today, I have undertaken the necessary action and sold those shares. Question No. 4—Housing 4. Hon MEKA WHAITIRI (Ikaroa-Rāwhiti) to the Minister of Housing: Does she have confidence in the operations of the Temporary Accommodation Service in Hawke's Bay following Cyclone Gabrielle? Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Minister of Housing): Yes. Through Budget 2023, the Government put in an additional $70 million through Vote Housing to deliver up to 400 relocatable cabins in four rohe, including Hawke's Bay, to temporarily house whānau displaced by the severe weather events. Government agencies are currently working through the contracts for these units, including up to 100 units in Hawke's Bay, with delivery through Ngāti Kahungunu or its hapū organisations. In terms of the Temporary Accommodation Service (TAS) appropriation, I can also report that three Portacabins have arrived in Waiōhiki today. TAS has also reported good progress in relation to a project to place relocatable homes on Ōmahu Marae land in Hawke's Bay. Hon Meka Whaitiri: Has she heard of reports that in the last week the Temporary Accommodation Service has evicted whānau from accommodation in Hawke's Bay at extremely short notice, including calling the police? Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: It would not be appropriate for me to speak on individual cases in the House, but if the member would like to provide me with her concerns in writing, I'm happy to work with her directly. But, generally speaking, what I can say is TAS does have an eligibility criteria and performs a needs assessment on all registered households to ensure that we can support the households who have found themselves displaced, and, in some cases, lost everything following a natural disaster. Following a needs assessment, it may become apparent that a household does not meet the criteria, and another Government agency would be best placed to assist. TAS then works with that agency to ensure a household transitions smoothly from TAS to them. Hon Meka Whaitiri: What assurances, if any, can she give these whānau who have lost their homes from the cyclone that they will be guaranteed the accommodation they need, particularly given that land categorisation in Hawke's Bay is still being consulted on? Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: What guarantees I can give are the answers that I gave in my primary question: that those households that are eligible for TAS assistance, there is currently already plenty of supply in the area and more is coming, that we've made the commitment, and, as I said to the member in the answer to the primary question only today, three more cabins have arrived. Chris Penk: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek the leave of the House to table a letter from me to the Minister for Cyclone Recovery, dated 19 May, highlighting issues of housing insecurity post – cyclone and flood issues, and also the reply which came from the Minister of Housing in relation to the same issue. SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There appears to be none. It may be tabled. Document, by leave, laid on the Table of the House. Question No. 5—Prime Minister 5. DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT) to the Prime Minister: On what specific dates since November 2020, if any, did the Cabinet Office communicate with the Prime Minister's office regarding Hon Michael Wood's shareholding in Auckland Airport, and who in the Prime Minister's office, if anyone, was aware of the shareholding prior to last week? Hon KELVIN DAVIS (Minister for Māori Crown Relations: Te Arawhiti) on behalf of the Prime Minister: On behalf of the Prime Minister, I have answered the first part of the question in response to question No. 1. For the second part of the question, no one currently in the Prime Minister's office was aware of this issue prior to last week. David Seymour: Point of order, Mr Speaker. It was a question on notice. It requires more than simply being addressed. If the Minister answering on behalf of the Prime Minister is clearly aware, because he's certain those people no longer work there, then surely he should identify those people at least by title. SPEAKER: Yes, I agree. As the member said, it was on notice. We did hear some dates yesterday. Hon KELVIN DAVIS: And today, and the positions. Hon Kieran McAnulty: Speaking to the point of order, Mr Speaker. SPEAKER: Well, I've ruled on it. I don't know if the member heard them—he might have said them. But if you've got them there—well, I'll give the member an extra two questions, and he can flesh them out a bit further. Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Point of order, Mr Speaker. SPEAKER: A new point of order? Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Yes. The dates were said in answer to Question No. 1. It's not for me to determine or for us to determine whether or not his hearing is good enough to hear it. SPEAKER: This is not a supplementary question. This the primary question. Do you want another opportunity to answer the primary question, or are we going to add extra supplementaries? Hon KELVIN DAVIS: I'll repeat the answer to question No.1, Mr Speaker: on behalf of the Prime Minister, the Cabinet Office has not communicated with the Prime Minister or his current office prior to the last week. I'm advised that the previous Prime Minister was informed that the Hon Michael Wood was in the process of divesting shares in Auckland Airport and Contact Energy as part of the annual reviews of ministerial interests in November 2021, November 2022. She was also informed he had divested his shares in March 2021. However, this was incorrect advice. In February 2022, the then chief of staff was informed by the Cabinet Office that they had provided advice to the Hon Michael Wood about divesting, and that the Minister had advised he was in the process of divesting the shares. Point of order, Mr Speaker. I think that question 1 fully answered it, and I referred— SPEAKER: Order! I will be the judge of relevance. Do you have a further supplementary? David Seymour: Thank you, Mr Speaker; I do. How can New Zealanders trust this Government when for 2½ years Michael Wood knew, the Cabinet Office knew, the Prime Minister's office knew, and it turns out the Prime Minister's chief of staff knew for part of the period but nothing was done about this blatant conflict of interest even when Michael Wood was making decisions that were relevant to his holding in Auckland International Airport? Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Based on the advice that the Prime Minister of the time was given, she would have assumed that the matter was in hand. David Seymour: Why shouldn't New Zealanders assume the reason Michael Wood is still a Minister is that the Prime Minister's office is donkey-deep and complicit in his wrongdoing so has no moral authority to— SPEAKER: The Minister can decide for himself whether he wants to answer that question—I'm standing up because clearly the question is out of order and was always going to lead to disorder in the House, but it's up to the Minister whether he wants to answer it or not—obviously not. David Seymour: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I just wanted to clarify if you'd still gifted those two additional supps. SPEAKER: Yes, absolutely. David Seymour: Is the Prime Minister aware that a company director so negligent in declaring their interests and carrying on for 2½ years would face severe penalties, and, if so, why should New Zealanders in business follow one set of rules when his Minister is left to follow another? Hon KELVIN DAVIS: The Prime Minister has made it clear that he's disappointed in the lack of action from Michael Wood, which is the reason he has been stood down from his transport portfolio. David Seymour: How are New Zealanders supposed to trust a Government when so much can go so wrong for so long, and yet, magically, it's never really anybody's fault? Hon KELVIN DAVIS: I reject that because Michael Wood has said that he failed to do what he should have done. Question No. 6—Housing 6. CHLÖE SWARBRICK (Green—Auckland Central) to the Associate Minister of Housing: Is she satisfied that the UN-recognised human right to adequate housing of the approximately 1.4 million renters in this country is being met? Hon BARBARA EDMONDS (Associate Minister of Housing): The Government is committed to working towards everyone having adequate housing. The Government has undertaken a number of actions since 2017 to improve housing for renters, including implementing the healthy homes standards, which aim to make a significant improvement in the quality of Aotearoa rental homes; improving security of tenure by removing no-cause terminations; adding over 12,000 public housing places since 1 November 2017, with around 10,000 new builds; banning letting fees; banning landlords from setting rental bids; and limiting rent increases to once per year. The Government recognises that there is always more work to do in this space and we are working on it. Chlöe Swarbrick: Does she believe that the exemptions for boarding houses and student accommodation in the Residential Tenancies Act are fit for purpose? Hon BARBARA EDMONDS: The Government's long-held position on access to housing is that the most important action that the Government can take is to keep increasing supply and keep up our focus on improving standards, such as the healthy homes standards, which do not apply to boarding houses. Chlöe Swarbrick: When can renters expect property managers to be regulated, as consultation options were released by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development over a year ago? Hon BARBARA EDMONDS: I acknowledge the challenges for renters in the market. The landlord-tenant relationship is also regulated by the Residential Tenancies Act. The Government is committed to regulating residential property managers to protect both landlords and tenants, and work continues on this. Chlöe Swarbrick: Is she aware that the United Kingdom is progressing a landlord registration scheme, and, if so, is she concerned that the exclusion of approximately 60 percent of rental homes managed by private landlords in the proposed New Zealand regulations puts us behind even the conservative UK Government? Hon BARBARA EDMONDS: We are an evidence-driven Government, and when we look to the evidence, the best way to control rent is to bring on the supply of new housing. I acknowledge the challenges, again, for renters in the market. The Government is consistently considering what we can do to help people who are renting. Chlöe Swarbrick: How many renting New Zealanders will, this winter, contract preventable illnesses from substandard rental housing? Hon BARBARA EDMONDS: I do not have the answer to that specific question. If the member would like to put it in writing, then I will try and respond to it. Question No. 7—Research, Science and Innovation 7. IBRAHIM OMER (Labour) to the Minister of Research, Science and Innovation: What announcement has the Government recently made about investing in the science system? Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL (Minister of Research, Science and Innovation): Budget 2023 positioned the New Zealand economy for a low-emissions, high-wage future, with a major investment in our science system. This includes the creation of three new multi-institution hubs to increase collaboration in research and science, association with the multi-billion dollar Horizon Europe research programme, and investing in our future research and science workforce. Ibrahim Omer: Why is the Government investing in multi-institution research hubs? Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: Through Budget 2023, we are creating three multi-institution research hubs to bring scientists closer together to increase collaboration, ensure better use of expensive equipment and facilities, and position New Zealand to meet complex challenges and seize economic opportunities. These hubs will place greater emphasis on innovation and create an environment that helps start-ups to grow and become significant contributors to the New Zealand economy through stronger coordination of innovation and commercialisation activities. Ibrahim Omer: How will the Government be supporting new talent in the science and research system? Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: This Government is committed to supporting new talent, addressing key domestic skills gaps, and improving career mobility. That is why, through Budget 2023, we are investing $55.2 million in research fellowships and to train more PhD students. The fellowships will help retain and develop more than 260 future research, science, and innovation leaders over the next 10 years. An additional fund for PhD students will provide certainty for researchers and improve the impact in applied science that these students get to take up. Ibrahim Omer: How will Budget 2023 support New Zealand's research to be showcased on the world stage? Hon Dr AYESHA VERRALL: Through Budget 2023, we are investing $37.6 million over four years in New Zealand's association to Horizon Europe. New Zealand's research will be showcased to the world as Kiwi scientists work alongside world-leading researchers to solve global challenges under the multibillion-dollar research programme. We will be one of the first non-European countries to offer our researchers access to the European Union's largest ever research and innovation programme on equal terms with European scientists. This is new funding for New Zealand science and underlines our commitment to building a modern, future-focused science and innovation system. Question No. 8—Police 8. Hon MARK MITCHELL (National—Whangaparāoa) to the Minister of Police: Does she stand by her statement, "It is my view that New Zealanders feel safer"; if so, why? Hon GINNY ANDERSEN (Minister of Police): I stand by my full statement in the context of that time: "It is my view that New Zealanders feel safer with a Government on track to deliver 1,800 extra police." As the member is aware, we have now delivered over 1,800 extra police. Hon Mark Mitchell: Why is crime increasing? Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: There are a number of drivers of crime, and the member is well aware from the Estimates this morning that the two main drivers of crime that increase demand to the police service are both family violence and mental health. Hon Mark Mitchell: How can New Zealanders feel safe when, since the member has become Minister of Police, gang numbers have grown by over 300? Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: I did not say that New Zealanders feel safer. Hon Mark Mitchell: So is she saying that New Zealanders shouldn't feel safer? Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: I have always been clear that what my statement was is that New Zealanders feel safer with 1,800 additional police than they did with fewer police. Those additional police on the front line mean that we have more services, we are quicker to respond, and we are able to provide more referrals into those key areas like family violence and mental health that are the underlying drivers of crime in New Zealand. SPEAKER: I just want to remind Government members not to interject while a question is being asked. Hon Mark Mitchell: So, just to give the Minister the chance to really clear this matter up, does she think that New Zealanders feel safer now in New Zealand— Hon David Parker: Point of order, Mr Speaker. There was an inappropriate imputation at the start of that question that did not form part of the question. SPEAKER: Yeah, and I would've preferred to hear the whole question. Since becoming the Speaker, the way that I have run question time, according to the will of the House—if that has changed, then the House should let me know—I'll make a judgment at the end of it. Hon Mark Mitchell: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Does the Minister think that Kiwis feel safer today than they did five years ago? Hon GINNY ANDERSEN: I cannot speak on behalf of all New Zealanders, but what I can say is that the police in New Zealand are far better resourced than they have ever been. This means we have more resources in our front line to respond to the pressing demands that are on police, and it means we have better investment in those services in mental health and family violence, through Te Aorerekura, to get ahead of those problems that are driving crime within our communities. Question No. 9—Social Development and Employment (Māori Employment) 9. ARENA WILLIAMS (Labour—Manurewa) to the Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment (Māori Employment): How is the Government supporting rangatahi into training and employment opportunities? Hon WILLIE JACKSON (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment (Māori Employment)): The Government is continuing to support rangatahi in providing more funding into new Māori trades and training in He Poutama Rangatahi programmes across the country. We're backing 52 new Māori kaupapa employment and training programmes, which will help Māori into further training, sustainable employment, or progress within their chosen careers. Last week in Dunedin, I announced a further $67.1 million to be invested in Māori trades and training in He Poutama Rangatahi programmes, supporting over 4,000 Māori across Aotearoa. Arena Williams: What does this funding mean for rangatahi Māori? Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Well, as we know, Māori are disproportionately disadvantaged in the labour market, and this is why this Government has a specific focus on improving Māori employment opportunities and outcomes. Programmes like He Poutama Rangatahi and Whakawātea te ara Poutama are delivered by providers with a connection to the rangatahi and their whānau, and they'll tailor the programme to meet specific needs and provide wraparound support. We recognise that communities know their people, and community-linked service providers are best placed to deliver on this important mahi. Arena Williams: How is this investment impacting the lives of rangatahi and their whānau? Hon WILLIE JACKSON: These programmes are not simply about getting people into employment; they all provide wraparound services that support participants to address social issues and support life changes that impact positively both for them, their whānau, and the community. We know that intensive support and upskilling will be needed to get young people, in particular, into work, so we've worked with providers to co-design programmes to address the need. Programmes can include but are not limited to mentoring, alcohol and drug awareness, reconnecting with whakapapa, and mental health support, such as counselling, life skills, literacy, and numeracy support. Arena Williams: How effective have these programmes been for rangatahi Māori? Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Oh, all good news again: 5,548 young people have gone into employment, education, or training— Hon Andrew Little: How many? Hon WILLIE JACKSON: —5,548—since 2018; 71 percent of all participants who complete their programmes enter employment, education, and/or training, so it's going well in that area; 820 participants have enrolled in the Māori Trades and Training Fund, and 635 have gained employment outcomes, or 77 percent, and 85 percent of whom have been in employment longer than six months. It's all good news. We're doing some wonderful work with young people. Māori trade training—all going well for Te Ao Māori at the moment. Kia ora, Mr Speaker. Question No. 10—Corrections 10. TONI SEVERIN (ACT) to the Minister of Corrections: Does he think that assessing a prisoner's psychological state when they enter prison is important for understanding their rehabilitation needs, and does he also think that assessing a prisoner's literacy and numeracy skills is important for understanding their education needs? Hon KELVIN DAVIS (Minister of Corrections): I think that both things are important in a prison context. I note that delivery of these services has been affected in recent times as Corrections—like many others—has faced challenges with COVID-19 and, more recently, staffing levels. However, I am advised that in the case of psychological reports, Corrections has also made improvements in their approach to risk assessment and is increasingly focusing its psychologists into treatment units and mental health teams. This means that more targeted assessment and support is taking place. Likewise, in the case of literacy and numeracy assessments, I'm advised that Corrections has streamlined the recording of assessments conducted, reducing the number of needless reassessments conducted, and has also seen an increase in the learners recorded in the NZQA database as having a qualification at level 1 of the New Zealand Qualifications Framework (NZQF) or higher, resulting in fewer prisoners requiring assessment. Toni Severin: Is it acceptable that Corrections has done 2,776 fewer psychological assessments on prisoners in 2022-23 compared to 2017-18 and has fallen almost by 38 percent, and how can Corrections know what psychological support prisoners need if they're not assessing them? Hon KELVIN DAVIS: Well, again, there's about three or four questions in that question. Not every person managed by Corrections will require an assessment by a psychologist or is willing to engage with a psychologist. As I said in the answer to the primary question, furthermore: a reduction in these numbers is to be expected, given improvements in Corrections' approach to risk assessment to ensure that people in prison are not unnecessarily assessed; and an increasing distribution of psychologists in prisons towards treatment and mental health support, targeting support where it is needed. They are also interim numbers, so do not account for a full financial year. Toni Severin: Is it acceptable that Corrections completed 61 percent fewer literacy assessments and 63 percent fewer numeracy assessments of prisoners in 2022-23 compared to 2018-19; and how can Corrections know what education support prisoners need if they're not assessing them? Hon KELVIN DAVIS: As I said in the answer to the primary question: reduction in these numbers is to be expected, given Corrections has streamlined the recording of assessments conducted, reducing the number of needless reassessments conducted; and has also seen an increase in learners recorded in the NZQA database as having a qualification at level 1 of the NZQF or higher, resulting in fewer prisoners requiring assessment. It's important to note that the interim figures for 2022-23 are already higher than the previous year, so we are making progress returning to pre - COVID-19 levels. Toni Severin: How is it possible that Corrections is doing far fewer psychological, numeracy, and literacy assessments than five years ago, when there are 38 percent fewer sentenced prisoners behind bars? Hon KELVIN DAVIS: As I said in the answer to the primary question: reduction in these numbers is expected, given Corrections has streamlined the recording of assessments, reducing the number of needless assessments, seeing an increase in learners recorded in the NZQA database as having a qualification at level 1, and resulting in fewer prisoners requiring assessment. David Seymour: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I'm sorry, due to the Hon Andrew Little shouting across the aisle, I literally couldn't hear what the Minister was saying and I actually did want to hear it. SPEAKER: Yeah, I could say that about a number of questions just about every single day. I've ruled previously that clearly the House is telling us that it don't want to hear. David Seymour: But— SPEAKER: Yeah, I know what you're going to say. But you can't have it both ways. Robust, to me, means both sides of the House. You can't be complaining about one side when, actually, the side that you're sitting on also does the same. If the House wants a different way, happy to hear it. David Seymour: Well, Mr Speaker— SPEAKER: A new point of order, or commentary? David Seymour: No. I wonder if that particular question might be repeated. If Mr Little can just contain himself, we might hear the answer. Question No. 11—Education 11. 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): In the context in which they were given, yes. Erica Stanford: On what date did the Minister first possess any knowledge or awareness that the term 3 attendance data could be released on the same day as the Government's truancy announcement on 21 February? Hon JAN TINETTI: Mr Speaker, I'm in a little bit of a difficult position here and I'm going to seek your guidance on this because this is actually currently before the Privileges Committee, to which they haven't had the report come back to the House. So I'm not certain what I can say in this House or not. Hon Michael Woodhouse: Speaking to that point, Standing Order 243(1) goes to the question of confidentiality of select committee proceedings, and the Privileges Committee is subject to these Standing Orders: "The proceedings of a select committee or subcommittee other than during the hearing of evidence are not open to the public and remain strictly confidential". Now, we've had an hour before the committee, where the Minister gave evidence in public, in front of the committee, in front of thousands of people watching around the country, and it'll be on the 6 o'clock news tonight. I can't see how that could possibly meet the terms of the confidentiality Standing Orders. SPEAKER: I'm going to allow that question. Hon JAN TINETTI: Can the member repeat the question, please? Erica Stanford: On what date did the Minister first possess any knowledge or awareness that the term 3 attendance data could be released on the same day as the Government's truancy announcement on 21 February? Hon JAN TINETTI: I would have to say that, from my recollection, I didn't have that knowledge until the data was actually released. That was on 23 February, I believe—I haven't got that information in front of me, but I'm willing to correct that if I have got that wrong. Erica Stanford: Why did she definitively tell The AM Show on 21 February that "term 3 data is going to be released today by the Ministry of Education" if she had no certainty the attendance data would be released that day? Hon JAN TINETTI: That was in the heat of a media interview. I genuinely had no knowledge of when that data was going to be released. Erica Stanford: Why, in a later interview on Breakfast on the same—[Interruption] SPEAKER: Order! Sorry, can you just start the question again? I couldn't hear. Erica Stanford: Why is it, on the same day after the AM Show, she stated on the Breakfast show that the data would be released that day or the following day? Hon JAN TINETTI: Same reason—exactly the same reason. I genuinely had no knowledge of when that data would be released. I was being interviewed by the media at that particular time. As I said in the committee this morning, I actually had a hope that the data would be released at some point. Erica Stanford: Is the Minister making a habit of saying things that she suspects or doesn't know is true and then standing by them? Hon JAN TINETTI: No. Erica Stanford: Why, when the Minister read emails on 5 April showing the Minister's office had input into the delaying of the attendance data, didn't the Minister at that point immediately correct her answer when the House sat the next day? Hon JAN TINETTI: As I said in the select committee this morning, that was when I started to have some questions around that. I wanted to talk about that with my staff at the time, but then we were going to rise for the recess. At that point in time, I didn't have the opportunity over the recess—I was on a ministerial trip to Ottawa and Washington. I was going to come back and have that conversation with my staff on 1 May, and then other events happened, such as a letter from yourself. Question No. 12—Emergency Management 12. JAMIE STRANGE (Labour—Hamilton East) to the Minister for Emergency Management: What recent announcements has he made on emergency management? Hon KIERAN McANULTY (Minister for Emergency Management): Yesterday, the Government introduced legislation to modernise our emergency management system. It takes on the lessons from previous responses to natural disasters, including the Christchurch and Kaikōura-Hurunui earthquakes, and other emergencies. The Emergency Management Bill replaces the two decades of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002. It is my hope that the select committee process will be able to incorporate any lessons that emerge from the Auckland floods and Cyclone Gabrielle. Jamie Strange: What are the key changes in the bill? Hon KIERAN McANULTY: The key changes include clarifying roles and responsibilities across the system at national, regional, and local levels; requiring civil defence emergency management group plans to identify and engage with communities that are disproportionately impacted by emergencies; recognising the important role Māori play in Aotearoa New Zealand's emergency management system; and enhancing Māori participation at all levels—national, regional, and local, and across strategic planning and operational activity. Jamie Strange: Why is it important for emergency responses to continue to be locally led? Hon KIERAN McANULTY: The strength of our emergency management system is that it is locally led, regionally coordinated, and centrally supported. The changes in the bill build on this strength. Locals know their communities best. They know the risks and they are first on the ground when disaster strikes.